Article
Is routine growth monitoring effective? A systematic review of
trials
Paul Garnera, Ratana Panpanichb, Stuart Loganc
a Liverpool School of
Tropical Medicine, Pembroke Place, Liverpool L3 5QA, UK, b Department of Community Medicine, Chiang
Mai University, Thailand, c Systematic Reviews Training Unit, Institute of
Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London, WC1N 1EH, UK
Correspondence to: Dr Garner email: pgarner{at}liv.ac.uk
Accepted 21 October
1999
BACKGROUND
Growth
monitoring consists of routine measurements to detect abnormal growth,
combined with some action when this is detected. It aims to improve
nutrition, reduce the risk of death or inadequate nutrition, help
educate carers, and lead to early referral for conditions manifest by
growth disorders. As primary care workers world wide invest time in
this activity, evidence for its benefits and harms was sort.
INCLUSION
CRITERIAStudies:
randomised or quasi-randomised controlled trials of
growth monitoring. Interventions: regular growth monitoring, combined
with some intervention targeted at abnormal growth, compared with
controls. Outcomes: anthropometric measures; referrals to primary and
specialist care, or community services; maternal knowledge, anxiety,
and satisfaction; child morbidity and mortality.
COMPARISONSRoutine
growth monitoring compared with no routine growth monitoring; routine
growth monitoring by plotting onto a standard chart compared with
monitoring with no chart.
SEARCH
STRATEGYCochrane controlled trials register;
World Health Organisation and World Bank publications; contact with
specialist community paediatricians working in the field.
RESULTSTwo trials met
the inclusion criteria. One compared growth monitoring with no growth
monitoring, in a cluster randomised trial nested in a nutritional
intervention programme, and detected no difference in nutritional
outcomes between the two groups. Another trial compared growth
monitoring with and without a standard chart, measuring maternal
knowledge of women about nutrition. It showed small numerical
differences in test scores.
DISCUSSION AND
IMPLICATIONSCurrent policies appear to be based
on the opinion that investment in the activity has worthwhile health
benefits, and does no harm. No reliable evidence was found to support
or refute this.
Keywords: growth monitoring; systematic review
© 2000 by Archives of Disease in Childhood
CiteULike 
Complore 
Connotea 
Del.icio.us 
Digg 
Reddit 
Technorati What's this?
This article has been cited by other articles:
-
Nash, A., Secker, D., Corey, M., Dunn, M., O'Connor, D. L.
(2008). Field Testing of the 2006 World Health Organization Growth Charts From Birth to 2 Years: Assessment of Hospital Undernutrition and Overnutrition Rates and the Usefulness of BMI. JPEN J Parenter Enteral Nutr
32: 145-153
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Grote, F K, van Dommelen, P, Oostdijk, W, de Muinck Keizer-Schrama, S M P F, Verkerk, P H, Wit, J M, van Buuren, S
(2008). Developing evidence-based guidelines for referral for short stature. Arch. Dis. Child.
93: 212-217
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Spencer, N J
(2007). Failure to think about failure to thrive. Arch. Dis. Child.
92: 95-96
[Full Text] -
Drake, A. J, Kelnar, C. J H
(2006). The evaluation of growth and the identification of growth hormone deficiency. EDUCATION AND PRACTICE
91: ep61-ep67
[Full Text] -
Sachs, M.
(2006). Routine weighing of babies: does it improve feeding and care?. J Child Health Care
10: 90-95
-
Rudolf, M C J, Logan, S
(2005). What is the long term outcome for children who fail to thrive? A systematic review. Arch. Dis. Child.
90: 925-931
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
Moyer, V. A., Butler, M.
(2004). Gaps in the Evidence for Well-Child Care: A Challenge to Our Profession. Pediatrics
114: 1511-1521
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
van Buuren, S, van Dommelen, P, Zandwijken, G R J, Grote, F K, Wit, J M, Verkerk, P H
(2004). Towards evidence based referral criteria for growth monitoring. Arch. Dis. Child.
89: 336-341
[Abstract] [Full Text] -
MORLEY, D
(2001). Growth monitoring. Arch. Dis. Child.
84: 89c-89
[Full Text]
eLetters:
Read all eLetters
- Systematic review had no relevance to routine monitoring as it is undertaken in the UK
- Michael Perkin
- ADC Online, 20 May 2000 [Full text]
- Growth monitoring
- David Morley
- ADC Online, 17 Jul 2000 [Full text]
- Re: Growth monitoring
- Paul Garner
- ADC Online, 31 Jul 2000 [Full text]
- Full Text
- Full Text (PDF)
- Submit a response
- Read responses to this article
- Alert me when this article is cited
- Alert me when eLetters are posted
- Alert me if a correction is posted
- Citation Map
Services
- Email this link to a friend
- Similar articles in ADC Online
- Similar articles in PubMed
- Add article to my folders
- Download to citation manager
- Request Permissions
Citing Articles
Google Scholar
PubMed
Topic Collections
-
Childhood nutrition
-
Childhood nutrition (paediatrics)
-
Clinical trials (epidemiology)
-
Epidemiologic studies
- Child health
Bookmark with
Register for free content
The full back archive is now available for all BMJ Journals. Institutional subscribers may access the entire archive as part of their subscription. Personal subscribers will also have access to all content when logged in. Non-subscribers who register have free access to all articles published before 2006 right back to volume 1 issue 1. Register here to access the free archive of all BMJ Journals.
Don't forget to sign up for content alerts so you keep up to date with all the articles as they are published.
