Relative Merits of Selected Anthropometric Measurements for Detecting Protein-Energy-Malnutrition (PEM) in Children Under Five Years in a Resource Limited Setting

Abstract

In order to find out the most sensitive anthropometric measurement that will diagnose Protein Energy Malnutrition (PEM) in Nigerian preschool children, three hundred children between the ages of 12 and 60 months (100 each of Normal, PEM and other malnutrition) were measured for height, weight, upper-arm circumference, triceps skinfold and subscapular skinfold thickness. The results showed that Triceps skinfold is the most sensitive anthropometric indicator for diagnosis of PEM in the study population. This supports the hypothesis that energy deficiency may be a more predominant factor in the causation of PEM in Nigeria.

New Perspectives on the Associations between Blood Fatty Acids, Growth Parameters, and Cognitive Development in Global Child Populations

“…T:T ratio and Mead acid levels correspond with physical symptoms of severe EFAD such as weight loss, skin changes, and visual and cognitive impairment as well as change in organ function [20][21][22]. The similarity between these adverse outcomes caused by EFAD and those caused by PEM demonstrates that the presence of EFAD and PEM in an individual may compound to produce more severe functional disruptions [9,23]. EFAD exacerbates the effects of PEM, and PEM may induce more severe EFAD because it disrupts the digestion and absorption of free fatty acids [9,23].…”

“…The identification of community childhood malnutrition in LMICs, however, is largely dependent on the physical manifestation of malnutrition, which is synonymous with protein energy malnutrition (PEM) [8]. Thus, malnutrition is often assessed using three categories of anthropometric measurements: those which assess body mass (such as weight), those which assess linear growth (such as height), and those which assess body composition (such as skinfold thickness, mid-upper arm circumference, and the relative proportions of subcutaneous fat and muscle) [9]. This is problematic because the sole use of anthropometric measurements to diagnose malnutrition can undermine the complexity of the condition.…”

“…The similarity between these adverse outcomes caused by EFAD and those caused by PEM demonstrates that the presence of EFAD and PEM in an individual may compound to produce more severe functional disruptions [9,23]. EFAD exacerbates the effects of PEM, and PEM may induce more severe EFAD because it disrupts the digestion and absorption of free fatty acids [9,23]. Thus, clinicians should consider assessing both EFAD and PEM in potentially malnourished individuals.…”