Skip Navigation

Journal of Tropical Pediatrics 2000 46(2):97-106; doi:10.1093/tropej/46.2.97
© 2000 by Oxford University Press
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-letters: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (3)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Gernaat, H.
Right arrow Articles by Voorhoeve, H.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Gernaat, H.
Right arrow Articles by Voorhoeve, H.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

A new classification of acute protein-energy malnutrition

HBPE GernaatA,Z and HWA VoorhoeveB

A Regional Institute of Community Mental Health Care, Leonard Springerlaan 39, 7941 GX Meppel, The Netherlands B Department of General Practice, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, The Netherlands Z Corresponding author Fax: 31522 51983 E-mail: gernaat@worldonline.n1

Current schemes to classify protein-energy malnutrition (PEM) in hospitalized children below 5 years of age in developing countries are of limited usefulness, because age is often not known and wasted children are insufficiently discriminated. In this study, a newly proposed scheme, based on the presence of wasting (weight-for-height ≤ 2z scores) and oedema, was compared with clinical and the original Wellcome criteria to classify PEM in 538 under-fives hospitalized for PEM in a rural hospital in Nchelenge, Zambia. Wasting in the absence of oedema was clinically false-positively diagnosed in 34.0 per cent, whereas the Wellcome classification gave rise to 28.6 per cent false-positive and 39.9 per cent false-negative diagnosis. In the presence of oedema, clinical diagnosis of wasting was 44.7 per cent false-positive and 41.4 per cent false-negative, while the Wellcome scheme had a false-negative rate of 54.3 per cent. We conclude that the Wellcome classification did not add to the clinical diagnostic accuracy of PEM as opposed to the proposed scheme, which merits further study. In an Appendix the use and calculation of z scores of weight-for-height is further explained.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.