Failure to respond to treatment in supplementary feeding programmes

By Prof Mike Golden and Yvonne Grellety

As highlighted in the recent large-scale retrospective review of emergency supplementary feeding programmes conducted by the ENN and SC UK, a significant number of children in these programmes fail to respond to treatment. Professor Mike Golden and Yvonne Grellety have developed an algorithm for the management of such cases. This approach has already been inserted into a number of national protocols (Ed).

A child with moderate malnutrition under treatment in a supplementary feeding programme (SFP) who is not responding as expected should not be allowed to remain in the standard programme, being given supplementary food month after month, until the child is eventually discharged as a "non-responder". This is unacceptable. Children who do not respond should be identified, investigated according to this protocol, and individual discharge determined by clinical or more specialist staff than normally operate a SFP.

Typical criteria for failure to respond to treatment are:

The reasons for failure to respond can be classified as:

  1. Problems with the application of the protocol
  2. Nutritional deficiencies that are not being corrected by the diet supplied in the SFP
  3. Home/social circumstances of the patient
  4. An underlying physical condition/illness
  5. Other causes

To address failure to respond, the following step-by-step procedure should be followed (outlined in Figure 1). Each step should be taken one at a time in the sequence shown and not omitting any step (see table 1).

  1. Protocol problems
    Where a substantial proportion of children fail to respond to treatment, the proper application of the protocol and the training of the staff at field level should be systematically reviewed - if necessary by an external evaluation. Any shortcomings should be rectified.
  2. Uncorrected nutritional deficiencies

    The diets normally used for supplementary feeding of moderately malnourished children are not designed to promote rapid catch-up weight gain, even if taken exclusively; the nutrient density does not compensate for the very low levels of some essential nutrients in the remainder of the diet. The diets often have low concentrations of several essential nutrients, the availability of these nutrients is often low and there are high concentrations of anti-nutrients. Furthermore, some products, such as UNIMIX and Corn Soya Blend (CSB) contain very high concentrations of iron that destroy other essential nutrients, such as vitamin C, during food preparation. Experience shows that about 25% of children lose weight or fail to grow, or that carers abandon SFPs because they see that their children are not recovering.

    An uncorrected nutritional deficiency can be investigated by changing the diet given in the SFP to one of higher quality. These diets are not given routinely as they are more expensive and less available than the standard diets. The possibilities are to give a diet with the specifications of a Ready to Use Therapeutic Food (RUTF) designed for the severely malnourished to promote rapid weight gain or, if not available, to give another higher quality diet (e.g. SP450). The quantity that needs to be given to achieve a response in this particularly group of children has not been investigated. Some agencies have given 200g of RUTF per day and reported a good response.

  3. Social problems

    There are often problems with intra-family distribution, sibling rivalry and very occasionally, rejection of a child (e.g. paternity problems), parental psychopathology (e.g. depression, post-violation, schizophrenia, etc), parental illness (e.g. HIV/AIDS), or use of the child's state to access food and services for the whole family. Child headed families/communities, abject poverty and social rejection by the community are other causes that may be found.

    To address this, if possible, a home visit is made to evaluate the home circumstances. However, most of these causes may not be clear even with a home visit. If the cause is not determined or a home visit is difficult to arrange within a reasonable time, then the child is admitted (day care) and fed under careful supervision for about 3 days. If the child gains weight well with directly observed feeding, yet fails to gain weight at home, then there is a major social problem. This is then investigated with an in-depth interview with the parents who have seen the child gain under supervised feeding and possibly a further home visit.

  4. Underlying medical conditions
    If the child does not respond to supervised feeding, then there is probably an underlying medical problem. A careful history and examination should be performed by a clinician and a search made for the common underlying conditions; in particular, TB, HIV, Leishmaniasis, schistosomiasis, other infections commonly found in the geographic area. Almost any condition in the paediatric textbook can present with malnutrition - cirrhosis, inborn errors of metabolism, chromosomal abnormalities, etc.
  5. Other conditions
    If an underlying condition is not found, then the child should be referred to a paediatric facility with special expertise and diagnostic facilities. This facility may be able to exclude cirrhosis, neurological disease, malabsorption syndromes, inborn errors of metabolism, chromosomal abnormality, developmental syndromes, etc. The main reason why a malnourished child should be referred to a specialist facility is for diagnosis of underlying conditions in children that do not respond to treatment. There will be a residue of children with untreatable underlying conditions. The further management of all the children with underlying conditions should be determined by the clinical facility and not the staff of the SFP.
Table 1: Implementation of step-by-step approach
Steps Actions Considerations
Diagnosis of failure to respond to treatment
Step 1 Improve nutritional intake
  Give RUTF, 1000kcal per day for 15 days (2 sachets per day) This is a diagnostic test! It is not treatment per se. We are giving a diet which we know will correct all known nutritional deficiencies and seeing if the child now responds. The test MUST involve the best diet available for recovery of a malnourished child.
Step 2 Review
  After 15 days (next visit), if he/she has now res- ponded to treatment, this means that it was a nutritional problem (type 2) Continue the treatment with 2 sachets of RUTF plus the SFP ration for a further month. It is unclear whether 2 sachets per day is the correct amount. This is an area for operational research - should the amount be adjusted according to the weight of the child? Would one sachet per day be enough? It is best to start with what we think will definitely work. Small studies should be conducted with limited numbers of children to test step-by-step reduced amounts and see how well these work.
  After 15 days (next visit), if he/she does not respond to treatment, this means that the dominant problem is NOT A NUTRITIONAL deficiency and that social or medical problems must be investigated. The next most likely reason is a social problem. Progress to Step 3  
Step 3 Investigate the home social circumstances; the home visit may pick up some social problems
  A problem is identified during the home visit that can be alleviated or solved. Deal with the problem, leave the child at home for follow up and further visits can be made in the following weeks. It is very important to realise that many/ most social problems will NOT be found during a home visit (such as discrimination against the child, neglect, parental manipulation, carer illness, siblings' rivalry, etc.). This is because parents' and children's behaviour changes during a visit by an outsider.
  A problem is identified during a home visit that cannot be alleviated or solved at home. Take any steps necessary to alleviate the problem - such as admission of the child to a facility, putting more resources into the home, arranging for a different carer (relative), getting treatment for the carer (eg psychiatric/HIV, etc).  
  During the home visit, if no problem is identified to account for the failure to respond to treatment, it is still likely that there is a social problem that has not been identified. Admit the child for a trial of feeding under supervision in a TFC for 3 days.  
Step 4 Investigation of underlying pathology
  If still the child is not responding to treatment, then he needs to be sent to a facility (hospital) where there are clinicians/paediatricians that are skilled in diagnostics and have the facilities to investigate the child.    
  If this facility does not find the cause, then the child should be referred to a national centre/ University for full investigation of unusual causes.    
  If the final referral centre does not find any cause for the failure of the child then there is no other choice but to label the child as idiopathic failure-to-respond. The cause of the malnutrition has not been found. Such children should perhaps be entered into a register, have specimens stored and be seen whenever there is a senior paediatrician with skill in severe malnutrition and in diagnostics visiting the country.    

 

For more information, contact Mike Golden, email: mike@pollgorm.net

More like this

en-net: Non-responder rate

Is there any acceptable level of Non responder rate and ideal way to manage in CMAM Program? Non-response can be seen as a species of program failure along with death and...

en-net: Multiple treatment failure in TFP - what to do?

In our program we have a girl age 18 months who has entered the therapeutic feeding program twice (most recently her MUAC was 10.5, WFH Z-score unavailable). The first time she...

FEX: WHO consultation on management of moderate malnutrition in U5s

The WHO, in collaboration with UNICEF, WFP and UNHCR, hosted a second consultation to discuss the programmatic aspects of the management of moderate malnutrition in children...

en-net: How to manage a Marasmic Child

If you were to manage a child aged months weighing 3kg with a MUAC 6.8, has never breastfed. Complementary food started at 2 wks. Currently Started F100 but the child...

FEX: Postscript to: 'A pragmatic approach to managing severe malnutrition: Is F75 always beneficial?'

Michael Golden,Yvonne Grellety It is quite wrong to consider the advantage of F75 as "theoretical". However, a decreased mortality will not be seen if other aspects of faulty...

en-net: monitoring MUAC change - use for decision making in follow-up visits

Monitoring weight change of children with SAM in outpatient care has been recommended: static weight or weight loss for 2 consecutive visits alerts the need for a home visit or...

FEX: Constraints to achieving Sphere minimum standards for SFPs in West Darfur: a comparative analysis

A view of Mornei camp The current conflict in Sudan's westernmost state of Darfur began in early 2003, although most humanitarian agencies only gained access to the area and...

FEX: Integration in CTC (Special Supplement 2)

by Jamie Lee Many of the articles in this supplement explore the concepts and practice of 'integration' within CTC programmes. A variety of meanings and values are attached to...

FEX: Home Based Treatment of Severe Malnutrition in Kabul

By Muriele Therry Muriele Therry studied ethnology at Masters level. After two missions with ACF, one year in Sakhalin as food security officer and 6 months in Afghanistan as...

FEX: Assessing the intervention on infant feeding in Gaza 2008

By Susan Thurstans and Vicky Sibson Susan Thurstans has been part of the emergency response team for nutrition with Save the Children UK since January 2009 and previously...

FEX: Multi-pronged approach to the management of moderate acute malnutrition in Guinea

By Dr Jean-Pierre Papart and Dr Abimbola Lagunju Dr. Jean-Pierre Papart MD, MPH, is Health advisor, Fondation Terre des hommes, Lausanne, Switzerland Dr Abimbola Lagunju MD,...

en-net: Target weight based minimum weight during treatment at OTP sites

Hello every one During treatment of SAM children in OTP we often find some drop in weight for new enrolled children in initial couple of weeks. Pakistan CMAM guideline...

FEX: Community-based Approaches to Managing Severe Malnutrition

One nutrition worker's solution to childcare at a busy feeding distribution! A three day meeting was held in Dublin hosted by Concern and Valid International between 8-10th of...

en-net: Inclusion of children with cngenital diseases in the management of acute malnutrition

Many congenital diseases such as congenital heart defects, metabolic diseases, cerbral palsy are known causes of chronic malnutrition, some chidren with such diseases are being...

FEX: Scaling up CMAM in the wake of 2010 floods in Pakistan

By Dr. M. Suleman Qazi Dr. Qazi was engaged by the ENN to capture the lessons from Pakistan on CMAM scale up. Dr Qazi is a medical graduate with a post graduate degree in...

FEX: Clinical Trial of BP100 vs F100 Milk for Rehabilitation of Severe Malnutrition

Child eating BP100 in Freetown TFC. By Carlos Navarro-Colorado and Stéphanie Laquière Carlos Navarro-Colorado is a medical doctor, with a MSc Epidemiology. He has ten years...

en-net: Your opinion sought on draft guidance to regulate marketing of Ready to Use Supplemental Foods

Ready to use supplemental foods (RUSFs) are receiving increasing attention by agencies working to alleviate problems of malnutrition. In late 2010, members of the NGO/Civil...

FEX: Ambulatory treatment of severe malnutrition in Afghanistan

By Emmanuelle Lurqin Emmanuelle is a paediatric nurse and since 2000, has worked with MSF Belgium on nutrition programmes in Angola, Burundi, and Afghanistan. She is currently...

FEX: Letter on inadequate coverage of SAM in Lancet Undernutrition Series, by Susan Shepherd

SAM inadequately addressed in the Lancet Undernutrition Series Dear Editor, In 2003, The Lancet captured and focused attention on saving children’s lives with the publication...

FEX: From the editor

Rabia, seven months, with her mother at an OTP Aim and structure of this special issue This Field Exchange special issue on ‘Lessons for the scale up of Community-based...

Close

Reference this page

Prof Mike Golden and Yvonne Grellety (2008). Failure to respond to treatment in supplementary feeding programmes. Field Exchange 34, October 2008. p23. www.ennonline.net/fex/34/failure