Cargando…

Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status

BACKGROUND: Underweight/ Undernourished is a state when the body mass index (BMI) falls below 18.5 kg/m2 and as per National Family and Health Survey-4, 22.9% of women in the reproductive age group fall into this category. Despite being considered as an important anthropometry marker, it is not meas...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Mishra, Kumar Guru, Bhatia, Vikas, Nayak, Ranjeeta
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7567285/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33102290
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_57_20
_version_ 1783596295684882432
author Mishra, Kumar Guru
Bhatia, Vikas
Nayak, Ranjeeta
author_facet Mishra, Kumar Guru
Bhatia, Vikas
Nayak, Ranjeeta
author_sort Mishra, Kumar Guru
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Underweight/ Undernourished is a state when the body mass index (BMI) falls below 18.5 kg/m2 and as per National Family and Health Survey-4, 22.9% of women in the reproductive age group fall into this category. Despite being considered as an important anthropometry marker, it is not measured in most of the healthcare facilities across India due to lack of basic amenities and resources. In such instances, how helpful other indicators like mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) can be to measure the undernourished status of pregnant needs to be determined. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of undernutrition in pregnant women (PW) based on baseline BMI and MUAC and to determine the association between them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Tangi Block of Odisha among 440 PW (in the first trimester) from July 2018 to November 2018 using a pre-tested, validated questionnaire and anthropometric instruments. RESULTS: PW having BMI <18.5 kg/m2 were found to be 16.6% and having MUAC <23.5 cm were 19.5%. A significant association was found between BMI and MUAC [aOR 7.91 (4.27–14.65)]. Also, a moderate correlation was established between the indicators (r = 0.57). CONCLUSION: MUAC can be used instead of BMI as it is easier to measure, cheaper, does not require any training or calculations, and insensitive to changes during the period of gestation unlike BMI. This can be beneficial to the healthcare workers at primary level who are in resource-limited settings.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-7567285
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2020
publisher Wolters Kluwer - Medknow
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-75672852020-10-22 Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status Mishra, Kumar Guru Bhatia, Vikas Nayak, Ranjeeta J Family Med Prim Care Original Article BACKGROUND: Underweight/ Undernourished is a state when the body mass index (BMI) falls below 18.5 kg/m2 and as per National Family and Health Survey-4, 22.9% of women in the reproductive age group fall into this category. Despite being considered as an important anthropometry marker, it is not measured in most of the healthcare facilities across India due to lack of basic amenities and resources. In such instances, how helpful other indicators like mid-upper arm circumference (MUAC) can be to measure the undernourished status of pregnant needs to be determined. OBJECTIVES: To estimate the prevalence of undernutrition in pregnant women (PW) based on baseline BMI and MUAC and to determine the association between them. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted in Tangi Block of Odisha among 440 PW (in the first trimester) from July 2018 to November 2018 using a pre-tested, validated questionnaire and anthropometric instruments. RESULTS: PW having BMI <18.5 kg/m2 were found to be 16.6% and having MUAC <23.5 cm were 19.5%. A significant association was found between BMI and MUAC [aOR 7.91 (4.27–14.65)]. Also, a moderate correlation was established between the indicators (r = 0.57). CONCLUSION: MUAC can be used instead of BMI as it is easier to measure, cheaper, does not require any training or calculations, and insensitive to changes during the period of gestation unlike BMI. This can be beneficial to the healthcare workers at primary level who are in resource-limited settings. Wolters Kluwer - Medknow 2020-07-30 /pmc/articles/PMC7567285/ /pubmed/33102290 http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_57_20 Text en Copyright: © 2020 Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0 This is an open access journal, and articles are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 License, which allows others to remix, tweak, and build upon the work non-commercially, as long as appropriate credit is given and the new creations are licensed under the identical terms.
spellingShingle Original Article
Mishra, Kumar Guru
Bhatia, Vikas
Nayak, Ranjeeta
Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title_full Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title_fullStr Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title_full_unstemmed Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title_short Association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
title_sort association between mid-upper arm circumference and body mass index in pregnant women to assess their nutritional status
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7567285/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33102290
http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_57_20
work_keys_str_mv AT mishrakumarguru associationbetweenmidupperarmcircumferenceandbodymassindexinpregnantwomentoassesstheirnutritionalstatus
AT bhatiavikas associationbetweenmidupperarmcircumferenceandbodymassindexinpregnantwomentoassesstheirnutritionalstatus
AT nayakranjeeta associationbetweenmidupperarmcircumferenceandbodymassindexinpregnantwomentoassesstheirnutritionalstatus