4.6 Article

Long-Term Weekly Iron-Folic Acid and De-Worming Is Associated with Stabilised Haemoglobin and Increasing Iron Stores in Non-Pregnant Women in Vietnam

期刊

PLOS ONE
卷 5, 期 12, 页码 -

出版社

PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0015691

关键词

-

资金

  1. Atlantic Philanthropies Inc.

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: The prevalence of anaemia and iron deficiency in women remains high worldwide. WHO recommends weekly iron-folic acid supplementation where anaemia rates in non-pregnant women of reproductive age are higher than 20%. In 2006, a demonstration project consisting of weekly iron-folic acid supplementation and regular de-worming was set up in two districts in a northern province in Vietnam where anaemia and hookworm rates were 38% and 76% respectively. In 2008 the project was expanded to all districts in the province, targeting some 250,000 women. The objectives of this study were to: 1) examine changes in haemoglobin, iron stores and soil transmitted helminth infection prevalence over three years and 2) assess women's access to and compliance with the intervention. Methods and Findings: The study was a semi-cross-sectional, semi-longitudinal panel design with a baseline survey, three impact surveys at three-, twelve- and thirty months after commencement of the intervention, and three compliance surveys after ten weeks, eighteen and thirty six months. Results: After thirty months, mean haemoglobin stabilised at 130.3 g/L, an increase of 8.2 g/L from baseline, and mean serum ferritin rose from 23.9 mu g/L to 52 mu g/L. Hookworm prevalence fell from 76% to 22% over the same period. After thirty six months, 81% of the target population were receiving supplements and 87% were taking 75% or more of the supplements they received. Conclusions: Weekly iron-folic acid supplementation and regular de-worming was effective in significantly and sustainably reducing the prevalence of anaemia and soil transmitted helminth infections and high compliance rates were maintained over three years.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据