Jump to: Page Content, Site Navigation, Site Search,
You are seeing this message because your web browser does not support basic web standards. Find out more about why this message is appearing and what you can do to make your experience on this site better.
the jury is still out
J Williams a Birmingham Children's Hospital NHS Trust,
Birmingham B4 6NH, b Northern Birmingham Community Trust, Carnegie Institute,
Handsworth, Birmingham, c University of Birmingham, Institute of Child Health,
Birmingham B4 6NH
Correspondence to: Professor Booth i.w.booth{at}bham.ac.uk
| |
Abstract |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Objective:
To compare the effect of unmodified cows' milk and iron supplemented formula milk on psychomotor development in
infants from inner city areas when used as the main milk source.
Design:
Double blind, randomised intervention trial.
Setting:
Birmingham health centre.
Subjects:
100 infants, mean age 7.8 months (range 5.7 to 8.6 months), whose mothers had already elected to use unmodified cows' milk as their infant's milk source.
Intervention:
Changing to an iron supplemented formula
milk from enrolment to 18 months of age, or continuing with unmodified cows' milk.
Main outcome measures:
Developmental assessments using
Griffiths scales at enrolment and at 18 and 24 months.
Results:
85 participants completed the trial. There were no significant differences in haemoglobin concentration between the two groups at enrolment, but by 18 months of age 33% of the unmodified cows' milk group, but only 2% of the iron supplemented group, were anaemic (P<0.001). The experimental groups had Griffiths general quotient scores that were not significantly different at
enrolment, but the scores in both groups declined during the study. By
24 months the decrease in the mean scores in the unmodified cows' milk
group was 14.7 whereas the decrease in the mean scores in the iron
supplemented group was 9.3 (P<0.02, 95% confidence interval 0.4 to
10.4). Mean subquotient scores were considerably lower in the
unmodified cows' milk group at 24 months; significantly so for
personal and social scores (P<0.02,
5.4 to 17.2).
Conclusion:
Replacing unmodified cows' milk with an
iron supplemented formula milk up to 18 months of age in infants from inner city areas prevents iron deficiency anaemia and reduces the
decline in psychomotor development seen in such infants from the second
half of the first year.
|
Key messages
|
| |
Introduction |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Iron deficiency anaemia
that is, a haemoglobin concentration
<110.0 g/l
still occurs in 10 to 30% of preschool children living in
inner cities in the United Kingdom.
1 2
There is a well established association between iron deficiency anaemia and
developmental delay, and randomised studies providing oral iron
supplements suggest that this may be causal.3-8 We have
previously shown that iron deficiency anaemia in infants and toddlers
receiving unmodified cows' milk as their main milk source is
eliminated by changing to an iron supplemented formula milk between 6 and 18 months of age.9 Our study aimed to address an
additional and pragmatic question: does randomisation to receive an
iron supplemented formula milk between 6 and 18 months of age lead to
an additional developmental advantage compared with continuing receipt
of unmodified cows' milk? Detailed haematological and nutritional data
from the study have already been published.9 We now
present the developmental outcomes.
| |
Subjects and methods |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Recruitment
Our keyworker (AD) received the names of all infants aged 6-8 months (567 identified) living in an inner city area of Birmingham from
health visitors dealing with that area. AD visited the families, and
the parents of only those infants whose mothers had already changed
their infant's diet to unmodified cows' milk (n=116) were asked to
consider including their infant in the study. All mothers were given
both verbal and written explanations of the study.
|
locally there was only
one bank and no large supermarkets. The small local shops were
expensive and had limited stocks of food, particularly fresh fruit and vegetables.
Power calculation
We performed a power calculation, which
showed that if 47 participants were allocated to each dietary group
this would provide a study power of 95% at a significance level of 5%
for a difference in haemoglobin concentration of 7.5 g/l between groups.
Study design
After recruitment we randomised the infants in the pharmacy
department at Birmingham Children's Hospital by random numbers in
blocks of four to receive either an iron supplemented formula milk or
to continue on unmodified cows' milk. We gave the results of
randomisation to AD who was therefore unblinded. At 18 months, those
infants randomised to change to an iron supplemented formula milk were
transferred back to cows' milk, and both groups continued on the
cows' milk until 24 months of age. Serial haematological, anthropometric, and developmental assessments using the Griffiths scales were made at enrolment and at 18 and 24 months of
age.10 We excluded those participants whose haemoglobin
concentration decreased to <90 g/l and referred them to their general practitioner.
|
Developmental assessments
The Griffiths scale calculates an overall developmental score
(general quotient), which is the mean of five subscales: locomotor,
personal and social, hearing and speech, eye and hand coordination, and
performance (manipulation and precision).10
We performed statistical analyses with
either paired and unpaired Student's t tests,
2 tests, or Fisher's exact tests, and analysis of variance.
Ethical approval
We obtained ethical approval from the
South Birmingham Health Authority's ethics committee. We obtained
informed written consent from caregivers.
| |
Results |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Withdrawals and losses
Some data points were missing due to intercurrent illness in a
participant, transiently being unable to locate children, or
insufficient volume of blood for assay. Out of 269 contacts, a
developmental score was unavailable on 11 occasions (3%).
After
randomisation we found no significant difference between the two groups
(table 2).
|
Haematology
At enrolment there were no statistically significant differences
in mean haemoglobin concentration between the two groups; 16% of the
cows' milk group and 13% of the iron supplemented formula milk group
were already anaemic.
Developmental outcomes
Interobserver differences
We found no statistically
significant differences when the developmental scores for the different
observers were compared by analysis of variance for both iron
supplemented formula milk and cows' milk groups.
At enrolment there were
no significant differences between the two groups. Scores in each group
declined during the study (table 3, fig 2). By 18 months the mean
general quotient score had decreased by 8.3 (P=0.002) and 6.7 (P=0.02)
points in the cows' milk and iron supplemented formula milk groups
respectively.
|
|
Subquotient scores
At enrolment there were no significant differences in mean
subquotient scores between the two study groups, but they declined in
both groups throughout the study (table 3, fig 3).
There was no
significant linear correlation between haemoglobin concentration and
general quotient scores at 24 months. However,
those participants allocated cows' milk were significantly clustered
towards both a lower haemoglobin concentration and lower general
quotient score than those receiving iron supplemented formula milk, who
were clustered significantly towards both a higher haemoglobin
concentration and general quotient score. Thus, of the 24 participants
with both a haemoglobin concentration <120 g/l and general quotient
score <100 at 24 months, 20 had received cows' milk. In contrast, 13 of the 16 with a haemoglobin concentration >120 g/l and a general
quotient score >100 had received iron supplemented formula milk
(P<0.0001).
|
Both groups grew satisfactorily
on both the iron supplemented formula milk and the cows'
milk.9
| |
Discussion |
|---|
|
|
|---|
Our study shows that in a population of socioeconomically deprived infants, changing from unmodified cows' milk to an iron supplemented formula milk from 7 to 18 months of age prevented iron deficiency anaemia at 24 months, and significantly reduced the decline in psychomotor performance seen in those infants randomised to continue on cows' milk.
Nutritional basis of the observed effects
In contrast to
other randomised studies, we chose to look at a realistic and practical
dietary intervention.
6 7
We have previously shown that
this intervention prevents the development of anaemia, but the precise
nutritional basis of the developmental advantage in the group receiving
iron supplemented formula milk is uncertain. The intakes of the two
groups also differed substantially in nutrients other than
iron.9 However, the strength of the recognised association
between iron deficiency anaemia and developmental delay, and the scale
of the difference in iron status between the two groups, lead us to
suggest that it is the disparity in iron status between the two groups
that is the most plausible explanation for the observed difference in
developmental performance.
Comparison with previous studies
Our findings support
previous studies of supplementation with oral iron in children with
iron deficiency anaemia, where an improvement in developmental
performance was noted.
6 7 12
Moffatt and colleagues
conducted a similar longitudinal cohort study to our own and showed a
developmental advantage at 9 and 12 months, which was no longer
detectable at 15 months of age.8 The transient nature of
the effect may have been due to differences in the timing, duration,
and mildness of the iron deficiency compared with our study group.
Basis of the developmental advantage
The Griffiths scale
has been well validated, and the subscales provide useful insights into
the basis of the differences in developmental
scores.
10 13
In our study the major difference was in the
personal and social subscale. This supports the view that iron
deficiency anaemia may exert its effects on developmental performance
by alterations in affect, thereby making a child clingy, lethargic,
irritable, and listless,5 and leading to impaired learning skills.
Implications of the study
We acknowledge that it is
difficult to quantify precisely the developmental advantage in the
infants receiving iron supplemented formula milk, but neverthless
believe that this study has a number of important implications.
Firstly, it confirms the well recognised observation that socioeconomic
deprivation places infants at increased risk of adverse developmental
outcomes.
14 15
Secondly, this developmental deficit
seems, in part, to be nutritionally mediated. Thirdly, iron deficiency
anaemia is common in high risk populations,14 and both
this and the developmental disadvantage are susceptible to a simple
intervention: the provision of an iron supplemented formula milk in
place of cows' milk.
Breast milk is clearly the milk of choice for the developing
infant.16 Our study suggests that in those mothers who
find breast feeding impractical, iron supplemented formula milk seems to be effective and acceptable, and benefits high risk infants and
children up to the age of at least 18 months.15
| |
Acknowledgments |
|---|
We thank the health visitors at Nechells Health Centre for their help, Dr P Davies for his statistical advice, and Dr M Huntley for advice on the Griffiths scales.
Contributors: IWB, AMacD, and AA had the original idea for the study, initiated it, and supervised its conduct. AD carried out the dietary intervention and data collection. TW took part in the developmental assessment and the preliminary data analyses. JW took part in the developmental assessment, collated and analysed the data and, with IWB, participated in writing the paper. IWB and JW will act as guarantors for the paper.
Funding: Farley Health Products.
Conflict of interest: None.
| |
References |
|---|
|
|
|---|
(Accepted 10 December 1998)
the jury is still out
Stuart Logan Systematic Reviews Training Unit,
Institute of Child Health, University College London Medical School,
London WC1N 1EH
It has been estimated that around 10% of young children in
the developed world and perhaps 50% in poor countries are iron deficient, with the burden falling disproportionately on less privileged children.1 In their randomised controlled
trial, Williams and colleagues report a 5.4 point smaller decline
between 6-8 and 24 months in Griffiths developmental quotient in
infants given iron supplemented feeds than in those given unmodified
cows' milk (95% confidence interval 0.4 to 10.4). If, as this finding suggests, iron deficiency in infancy causes developmental deficit its
prevention should be a public health priority.
This trial was small but generally well conducted: central
randomisation ensured appropriate allocation concealment and assessment of outcome was blind to treatment group. It is unfortunate that a small
number of children were excluded from analysis for what seem to be
inappropriate reasons, including "failed protocol," "autism,"
thalassaemia, and anaemia. In small trials, exclusions after
randomisation may be important in the interpretation of results,
particularly where confidence intervals barely exclude 0. Interpretation is further complicated by the finding of virtually no
difference between groups at 18 months.
The evidence from earlier studies is conflicting. A Canadian
randomised controlled trial of iron supplementation in infants suggested a beneficial effect of supplementation at 9 and 12 months but
not at 6 or 15 months and was weakened by substantial losses to follow
up.2 A randomised controlled trial of iron supplementation between 6 and 12 months in 944 previously breastfed infants found no
differences between groups in Bayley scale scores at 12 months although
iron deficiency anaemia was common in the unsupplemented group.3 Two trials of iron treatment in toddlers with iron deficiency anaemia have reported on developmental findings 2-4 months
after starting treatment. In a placebo controlled trial including 50 infants with iron deficiency anaemia, Idjradinata and Pollitt reported
a significantly greater improvement in Bayley scale scores in the iron
treated group.4 However, Aukett and colleagues in a
similar study found no significant differences between treated and
control groups in changes in Denver developmental screening test scores
although, as a result of inappropriate dichotomisation of continuous
data, the study is frequently quoted as suggesting a positive effect of
treatment.5
Although this trial tilts the balance of probability towards belief in
a causal link between iron deficiency and developmental deficit, the
evidence remains unclear. A call for more research may be interpreted
as an attempt to avoid decision making, but, particularly where
interventions are costly or may have adverse consequences, clarity of
evidence is essential. Prevention of iron deficiency is difficult. In
spite of the high bioavailablity of iron in breast milk, both breastfed
and bottle fed infants are at risk of developing iron deficiency unless
sufficient iron is provided by the weaning diet. Dietary advice may not
be effective in preventing iron deficiency anaemia,6 and
the administration of elemental iron may have side
effects.7 Large trials of both iron supplementation in
infants and iron treatment in children with iron deficiency anaemia are
urgently needed.
![]()
References
© BMJ 1999
Read all Rapid Responses