J. ofNutr. Educ. Vol. 21, No.1 plete Ie questionnaire etaiant a la fois responsables de l'education en nutrition de l'enfant et du service alimentaire, et non du programme d'etudes; seulement quatre des douze documents educatifs sur lesquels portaient les questionnaires se trouvaient dans trois-quart ou plus des reseaux scolaires; les methodes de distribution utilisees dans ces reseaux dependaient du type de material de l' education en nutrition utilise dans les ecoles, et la personne ala fois responsable de l'education en nutrition aupres des enfants, et du service alimentaire etait Ie plus souvent impJiquee dans la dissemination du materiel educatif. IJNE 21:11-15, 1989) Source: Louise Desaulniers RESUMEN Se realiz6 una encuesta en una selecci6n de muestra de escuelas de la Carolina del Norte para determinar 1) la utilizaci6n de materiales pedag6gicos relativos a la nutri- ci6n, distribuidos por el programa educativo en nutrici6n y formaci6n profesional (NET) de este estado, 2) de que modo February 1989 15 llegaron estos materiales a cada complejo escolar y 3) c6mo se distribuyeron tales materiales. La encuesta se llev6 a cabo en ochenta y uno sistemas escolares estratificados, escogidos al azar. EI instrumento del sondeo, un cuestionario auto-administrado, se despach6 por correo al responsable del program a de estudios en cada sistema. Se observ6 siguiente: la mayor parte de los oficiales que respondieron a la encuesta fueron los encargados de servicios alimentarios 0 de la educaci6n en nutrici6n de menores, y no del programa de estudios; s610 cuatro de los doce documentos pedag6gicos tratados en el cuestionario se encontraban en las tres cuartas partes 0 mas de estos sistemas educativos; el metodo empleado en la distribuci6n de materiales a escuelas dentro del sistema se relacionaba al tipo de materiales utilizados en el sistema para la instrucci6n en nutrici6n; y el individuo encargado tanto de nutrici6n de menores como del servicio alimentario de la escuela era el que con mas frecuencia diseminaba los materiales indicados. IJNE 21:11-15, 1989) Translated by H. T. Sturcken LACK OF ADVERSE REACTIONS TO IRON·FORTIFIED FORMULA Nelson et al. contrasted the effects of iron-fortified and non-iron-fortified formulas on behavior and stool characteristics in thirty-one infants (Pediatrics 81:360-364, 1988). The investigation involved three studies, each lasting 12-15 weeks, and included one and sixteen week old infants. All three studies employed a cross-over design (infants alternated between the high or low iron formulas for two week intervals). Two of the studies were double-blind. Parents made daily observations and reported on a four point scale (absent to severe) on their infants' fussiness, cramps, regurgitation, flatus, and colic, as well as stool characteristics of frequency, consistency (six descriptors), and color (five descriptors). The behavioral factors did not vary significantly according to whether the infants received high or low iron formula (probabilities ranged from 0.41 to 0.99). Cramps were virtually unreported, and flatus, regurgitation, and fussiness, while reported more frequently, were rarely severe. Frequency of stools varied with age but not with formula (probabilities 0.76 to 0.96). Reports of stool consistency were predominantely "soft" or "loose," but also did not differ significantly according to type of formula (probabilities 0.08 to 0.47). The only stool characteristic or behavior that showed a significant difference was stool color, in which the iron-fortified formula was associated with darker and/or greener stools. Results of this study suggest that considerations for the use of iron-fortified formula should be based on need and not on the fear of adverse reactions to the high iron. (5 references) Summary written by Garry Auld

Lack of adverse reactions to iron-fortified formula

Download PDF Report

Upload
garry-auld
View
215
Download
1

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: Lack of adverse reactions to iron-fortified formula

J. ofNutr. Educ. Vol. 21, No.1

plete Ie questionnaire etaiant a la fois responsables de l'education en nutrition de l' enfant et du service alimentaire, et non du programme d'etudes; seulement quatre des douze documents educatifs sur lesquels portaient les questionnaires se trouvaient dans trois-quart ou plus des reseaux scolaires; les methodes de distribution utilisees dans ces reseaux dependaient du type de material de l' education en nutrition utilise dans les ecoles, et la personne ala fois responsable de l'education en nutrition aupres des enfants, et du service alimentaire etait Ie plus souvent impJiquee dans la dissemination du materiel educatif. IJNE 21:11-15, 1989)

Source: Louise Desaulniers

RESUMEN Se realiz6 una encuesta en una selecci6n de muestra de escuelas de la Carolina del Norte para determinar 1) la utilizaci6n de materiales pedag6gicos relativos a la nutrici6n, distribuidos por el programa educativo en nutrici6n y formaci6n profesional (NET) de este estado, 2) de que modo

February 1989 15

llegaron estos materiales a cada complejo escolar y 3) c6mo se distribuyeron tales materiales.

La encuesta se llev6 a cabo en ochenta y uno sistemas escolares estratificados, escogidos al azar. EI instrumento del sondeo, un cuestionario auto-administrado, se despach6 por correo al responsable del program a de estudios en cada sistema.

Se observ6 siguiente: la mayor parte de los oficiales que respondieron a la encuesta fueron los encargados de servicios alimentarios 0 de la educaci6n en nutrici6n de menores, y no del programa de estudios; s610 cuatro de los doce documentos pedag6gicos tratados en el cuestionario se encontraban en las tres cuartas partes 0 mas de estos sistemas educativos; el metodo empleado en la distribuci6n de materiales a escuelas dentro del sistema se relacionaba al tipo de materiales utilizados en el sistema para la instrucci6n en nutrici6n; y el individuo encargado tanto de nutrici6n de menores como del servicio alimentario de la escuela era el que con mas frecuencia diseminaba los materiales indicados. IJNE 21:11-15, 1989)

Translated by H. T. Sturcken

LACK OF ADVERSE REACTIONS TO IRON·FORTIFIED FORMULA

Nelson et al. contrasted the effects of iron-fortified and non-iron-fortified formulas on behavior and stool characteristics in thirty-one infants (Pediatrics 81:360-364, 1988). The investigation involved three studies, each lasting 12-15 weeks, and included one and sixteen week old infants. All three studies employed a cross-over design (infants alternated between the high or low iron formulas for two week intervals). Two of the studies were double-blind. Parents made daily observations and reported on a four point scale (absent to severe) on their infants' fussiness, cramps, regurgitation, flatus, and colic, as well as stool characteristics of frequency, consistency (six descriptors), and color (five descriptors).

The behavioral factors did not vary significantly according to whether the infants received high or low iron formula (probabilities ranged from 0.41 to 0.99). Cramps were virtually unreported, and flatus, regurgitation, and fussiness, while reported more frequently, were rarely severe. Frequency of stools varied with age but not with formula (probabilities 0.76 to 0.96). Reports of stool consistency were predominantely "soft" or "loose," but also did not differ significantly according to type of formula (probabilities 0.08 to 0.47). The only stool characteristic or behavior that showed a significant difference was stool color, in which the iron-fortified formula was associated with darker and/or greener stools. Results of this study suggest that considerations for the use of iron-fortified formula should be based on need and not on the fear of adverse reactions to the high iron. (5 references)

Summary written by Garry Auld