Assessment of Nutritional Status of under-five year rural children in ...
Assessment of Nutritional Status of under-five year rural children in ...
Assessment of Nutritional Status of under-five year rural children in ...
You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles
YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.
<strong>Assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>under</strong>-<strong>five</strong> <strong>year</strong> <strong>rural</strong> <strong>children</strong> <strong>in</strong> the Districts <strong>of</strong><br />
Madhya Pradesh State<br />
District: UJJAIN<br />
Morena<br />
Bh<strong>in</strong>d<br />
Sheoppur<br />
Gwalior<br />
Datia<br />
Shivpuri<br />
Neemuch<br />
Mandsaur<br />
Ratlam Ujja<strong>in</strong><br />
Jhabua<br />
Indore<br />
Dhar<br />
Alirajpur<br />
Rajgarh<br />
Shajapur<br />
Dewas<br />
Sehore<br />
Guna<br />
Harda<br />
Bhopal<br />
Ashok<br />
Nagar<br />
Vidisha<br />
Raisen<br />
Hoshangabad<br />
Tikamgarh<br />
Sagar<br />
Narsimhapur<br />
Chh<strong>in</strong>dwara<br />
Chhatarpur<br />
Panna<br />
Damoh<br />
Seoni<br />
Jabalpur<br />
Katni<br />
Mandla<br />
Satna<br />
Umaria<br />
D<strong>in</strong>dori<br />
Rewa<br />
Shahdol<br />
Sidhi<br />
Anuppur<br />
S<strong>in</strong>grauli<br />
Barwani<br />
Khargone<br />
Khandwa<br />
Betul<br />
Balaghat<br />
Burhanpur<br />
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NUTRITION<br />
Indian Council <strong>of</strong> Medical Research<br />
Hyderabad – 500 007<br />
2011
<strong>Assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong><br />
Five <strong>year</strong> Rural <strong>children</strong> <strong>in</strong> the Districts <strong>of</strong><br />
Madhya Pradesh State<br />
- Ujja<strong>in</strong> District<br />
G.N.V.Brahmam<br />
K.Venkaiah<br />
A.Laxmaiah<br />
I.I.Meshram<br />
K.Mallikharjuna Rao<br />
Ch.Gal Reddy<br />
Sharad Kumar<br />
M.Rav<strong>in</strong>dranath<br />
K.Sreerama Krishna<br />
National Institute <strong>of</strong> Nutrition<br />
Indian Council <strong>of</strong> Medical Research<br />
Hyderabad – 500 007<br />
2011
CONTENTS<br />
Page No.<br />
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />
PROJECT STAFF<br />
RESULTS AT GLANCE<br />
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY<br />
i – iii<br />
1. INTRODUCTION 1 – 4<br />
1.1 Pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> Ujja<strong>in</strong> District 4<br />
2. OBJECTIVES 4<br />
2.1 General Objective 4<br />
2.2 Specific objectives 4<br />
3. METHODOLOGY 4 – 7<br />
3.1 Sampl<strong>in</strong>g Design 4<br />
3.1.1 Sample size 4<br />
3.1.2 Selection <strong>of</strong> Villages 5<br />
3.1.3 Selection <strong>of</strong> Households 5<br />
3.2 Investigations 5<br />
3.2.1 Household demographic and socioeconomic Particulars 5<br />
3.2.2 Anthropometry 5<br />
3.2.3 Cl<strong>in</strong>ical exam<strong>in</strong>ation 5<br />
3.2.4 History <strong>of</strong> Morbidity 6<br />
3.2.5 Maternal Particulars 6<br />
3.2.6 Infant and Young child feed<strong>in</strong>g practices 6<br />
3.2.7 Coverage <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> <strong>under</strong> various health & nutrition<br />
<strong>in</strong>tervention Programmes 6<br />
3.2.8 Spot test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> household cook<strong>in</strong>g salt for Iod<strong>in</strong>e 6<br />
3.3 Recruitment, tra<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g, standardization <strong>of</strong> field Investigators and<br />
data collection<br />
3.4 Quality Control 7<br />
3.5 Data Analysis 7<br />
4. RESULTS 7 – 19<br />
4.1 Coverage 7<br />
4.2 Household Socio-economic and Demographic particulars 7<br />
4.2.1 Community 8<br />
4.2.2 Type <strong>of</strong> family 8<br />
4.2.3 Family size 8<br />
4.2.4 Literacy status <strong>of</strong> father 8<br />
4.2.5 Literacy status <strong>of</strong> mother 8<br />
6<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
4.2.6 Household landhold<strong>in</strong>g 8<br />
4.2.7 Major occupation <strong>of</strong> father 8<br />
4.2.8 Major occupation <strong>of</strong> Mother 8<br />
4.2.9 Per capita monthly <strong>in</strong>come 9<br />
4.3 Household Physical facilities 9<br />
4.3.1 Type <strong>of</strong> house 9<br />
4.3.2 Household amenities 9<br />
4.4 Iod<strong>in</strong>e content <strong>of</strong> Cook<strong>in</strong>g salt 9<br />
4.5 Maternal characteristics 9<br />
4.5.1 Age and parity <strong>of</strong> mother 9<br />
4.5.2 Particulars <strong>of</strong> last Pregnancy (mothers <strong>of</strong>
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS<br />
We express our s<strong>in</strong>cere thanks to Mr. B.R. Naidu, I.A.S, Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal Secretary,<br />
and Smt. T<strong>in</strong>oo Joshi, I.A.S, and Dr. Loveleen Kacker, I.A.S, past Pr<strong>in</strong>cipal<br />
Secretaries, Women and Child Development & Social Justice Department,<br />
Government <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh for provid<strong>in</strong>g us an opportunity to carry out this<br />
study.<br />
Our thanks are due to Ms. Kam<strong>in</strong>i Chauhan I.A.S, Deputy Secretary, Dr.<br />
Anupam Rajan, Director and Shri. Akshaya Srivatsav, Jo<strong>in</strong>t Director, Women and<br />
Child Development Department, Government <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh for their support<br />
dur<strong>in</strong>g the study.<br />
We are also thanksful to Shri. Gulshan Bamra, former Director, and Sri Praveen<br />
Kumar Gangrade, former Jt. Director, Women and Child Development Department,<br />
Government <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh, and their colleagues for extend<strong>in</strong>g their cooperation and<br />
help <strong>in</strong> the execution <strong>of</strong> this study.<br />
The <strong>in</strong>frastructural & logistic support extended by Pr<strong>of</strong>. S.K. Trivedi,<br />
Executive Director, Mr. Gokul pal, Research Officer and their colleagues at Indian<br />
Institute <strong>of</strong> Development Management (IIDM), Bhopal is gratefully acknowledged.<br />
Our thanks are also due to UNICEF-Madhya Pradesh and UNICEF-New Delhi<br />
for their support by provid<strong>in</strong>g anthropometric equipment for use <strong>in</strong> this study.<br />
The help and support provided by the Districts Project Officers, Child<br />
Development Project Officers, Supervisors, Anganwadi Workers (AWWs) and<br />
ASHA worker (Health functionaries) <strong>of</strong> the concerned districts <strong>in</strong> the execution <strong>of</strong><br />
the survey, is gratefully acknowledged.<br />
Our s<strong>in</strong>cere thanks to the entire field staff for their commitment and<br />
s<strong>in</strong>cere efforts <strong>in</strong> the collection <strong>of</strong> data.<br />
We grateful to Dr. B. Sesikeran, Director, N.I.N and Dr. Vishwa Mohan<br />
Katoch, Director-general, I.C.M.R, and Secretary, Department <strong>of</strong> Health Research,<br />
M<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> Health and Family Welfare, GoI, for their constant support and<br />
encouragement.<br />
We also thank Mr. G.Manohar Reddy, Research Officer, Mr. R. Raghunath<br />
Babu, Technical Assistant, Mrs. G.Madhavi, Technician, Ms. D.Sarala & G.Madhavi<br />
Tabulators, NNMB-CRL, and Ms. D. Balamani, Ms. D. Saritha & Ms. M. Venkata<br />
Ramanamma, Punch Operators, and Mrs. L. Rajeswari & Mr. M. Shashi Kumar Reddy,<br />
Data Entry Operators for their technical help.<br />
We are also thankful to Mr. G. Hanumantha Rao, and Mrs. G. Prashanthi,<br />
Personal Assistants for their secretarial assistance.<br />
Last but not least, we are extremely grateful to the community for their<br />
unst<strong>in</strong>t<strong>in</strong>g cooperation, without which the study would not have been completed<br />
successfully.<br />
Authors
PROJECT STAFF<br />
RESEARCH ASSISTANTS<br />
Sl.No.<br />
Name<br />
1. Ms. Monali Dhote<br />
2. Mr. Abhishek Panchbudhe<br />
3. Mr. Ritesh Mangroliya<br />
FIELD INVESTIGATORS<br />
Sl.No.<br />
Name<br />
1. Mr. Naval Kishore Harode<br />
2. Mr.Santosh Kumar Choudhary<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
RESULT AT GLANCE
RESULTS AT A GLANCE<br />
DISTRICT PROFILE<br />
Total population (2001 Census) 17,09,885<br />
Sex Ratio 940<br />
Population density (per sq km) 281<br />
Percent <strong>of</strong> Schedule caste 24.7<br />
Percent <strong>of</strong> Schedule Tribes 3.1<br />
Literacy status (%) 71.2<br />
Female literacy (%) 57.9<br />
SAMPLE CHARACTERISTICS<br />
HHs surveyed (n) 396<br />
Average Family size (n) 6.9<br />
Average per capita monthly <strong>in</strong>come (Rs) 586<br />
COMMUNITY (%)<br />
Scheduled Caste 30.6<br />
Scheduled Tribe 2.5<br />
TYPE OF FAMILY (%)<br />
Nuclear 40.4<br />
Extended Nuclear 14.6<br />
Jo<strong>in</strong>t 45.0<br />
LITERACY STATUS (%)<br />
Father 68.9<br />
Mother 44.9<br />
LAND HOLDING (% HHs)<br />
Land less Families 46.7<br />
Marg<strong>in</strong>al Farmers 12.6<br />
Small Farmers 16.7<br />
Large Farmers 24.0<br />
.<br />
(Contd… 2)<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong> < 5 yr Children Ujja<strong>in</strong> Dt.- Madhya Pradesh
RESULTS AT A GLANCE (Contd…2)<br />
MAJOR OCCUPATION OF HOUSEHOLD Percent<br />
Labourers 49.5<br />
Cultivators 40.2<br />
Land Lords -<br />
Artisans 1.0<br />
Service 4.3<br />
Bus<strong>in</strong>ess 3.3<br />
TYPE OF HOUSE<br />
Kutcha 33.8<br />
Semi-Pucca 56.4<br />
Pucca 9.8<br />
SOURCE OF DRINKING WATER<br />
Open well 7.6<br />
Tube well 86.4<br />
Tap 5.8<br />
HOUSEHOLD ELECTRICITY 94.4<br />
PRESENT AND USING SANITARY LATRINE 19.9<br />
IODINE CONTENT OF COOKING SALT<br />
0 ppm 3.0<br />
Delivery conducted by<br />
RESULTS AT A GLANCE (Contd…3)<br />
PARTICULARS<br />
BREAST FEEDING AND COMPLEMENTARY FEEDING<br />
Initiate <strong>of</strong> Breast feed<strong>in</strong>g & Other practices<br />
Children solely breast fed<br />
Age <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiation <strong>of</strong> complementary Feed<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Immunization ( 12-24 months <strong>children</strong>)<br />
Percent<br />
M.O. PHC 58.2<br />
ANM/LHV 12.7<br />
Pvt. Doctor 10.9<br />
Untra<strong>in</strong>ed Dai/Others 18.2<br />
Low birth weight (% <strong>in</strong>fants) 40.0<br />
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary<br />
Undernutrition cont<strong>in</strong>ues to be a major public health problem <strong>in</strong> the develop<strong>in</strong>g<br />
countries, <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g India, the most vulnerable groups be<strong>in</strong>g women and young<br />
<strong>children</strong>. Proper nutrition is necessary for adequate growth and development <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>children</strong>. Undernutrition is <strong>of</strong> multi-factorial aetiology, which <strong>in</strong>clude both food and<br />
non-food factors.<br />
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to the recent reports <strong>of</strong> NFHS-3 (2005-06), the prevalence <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>under</strong>weight (
About 93% <strong>of</strong> pregnant women had <strong>under</strong>gone Antenatal check-up (ANC) <strong>of</strong><br />
whom about 55% had ≥3 ANCs. Only 62% <strong>of</strong> pregnant women were registered for<br />
ANC before 16 weeks <strong>of</strong> gestation. Majority (92.9%) <strong>of</strong> pregnant women received IFA<br />
tablets dur<strong>in</strong>g pregnancy, 50% received ≥ 90 tablets and about 33% reportedly<br />
consumed ≥90 tablets. About 82% deliveries were <strong>in</strong>stitutional, either <strong>in</strong> government or<br />
private hospitals. Majority (69%) <strong>of</strong> deliveries were conducted by a medical doctor.<br />
Birth weights were reportedly recorded for 80% <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>fants and records were available<br />
for 64% <strong>in</strong>fants. The overall prevalence <strong>of</strong> low birth weight was 40%.<br />
Most <strong>of</strong> the mothers (85.5%) fed colostrum to their newborns. About 9% <strong>of</strong><br />
mothers <strong>in</strong>itiated breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong> 1 hour, 59% did so with<strong>in</strong> 1-3 hours and 14%<br />
<strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>in</strong>itiated breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g between 4 and 11 hours <strong>of</strong> delivery. Pre-lacteal<br />
feeds such as pla<strong>in</strong> water, cow/buffalo milk and honey were given to 21% <strong>of</strong> the<br />
<strong>in</strong>fants.<br />
Among 6-11 months <strong>children</strong>, complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g was <strong>in</strong>itiated at 6<br />
months <strong>of</strong> age <strong>in</strong> only about 9%, while 22% <strong>children</strong> received the same dur<strong>in</strong>g 7-8<br />
months <strong>of</strong> age. About 65% <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> did not yet start complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
About 34% were receiv<strong>in</strong>g cow/buffalo milk and home made semisolids/solids (10%)<br />
and, about 16% were receiv<strong>in</strong>g such foods at least 3 times a day.<br />
Among 12-35 months <strong>children</strong>, 51% were receiv<strong>in</strong>g complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g,<br />
<strong>in</strong> addition to breast milk. Majority were receiv<strong>in</strong>g home made semisolids/solids and<br />
71% were receiv<strong>in</strong>g such foods at least 3 times a day.<br />
About 90% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> were completely immunized. About 85% <strong>of</strong> 9-59<br />
months <strong>children</strong> received at least one dose <strong>of</strong> Vitam<strong>in</strong> A dur<strong>in</strong>g the preced<strong>in</strong>g <strong>year</strong>.<br />
About 74-85% <strong>of</strong> 18-59 months <strong>children</strong> received the stipulated two doses.<br />
Less than 1% <strong>of</strong> 12-59 months <strong>children</strong> received 60-90 IFA tablets while less<br />
than 1% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> consumed 60-90 tablets.<br />
None <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>fant exhibited cl<strong>in</strong>ical sign <strong>of</strong> nutritional deficiency, while about<br />
1% <strong>children</strong> had conjunctival xerosis and 0.2% had Bitot spot.<br />
About 57% <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> reportedly had one or more features <strong>of</strong> morbidity such<br />
as fever, ARI and diarrhoea dur<strong>in</strong>g the preced<strong>in</strong>g fortnight. The prevalence was<br />
relatively higher among 6-11 months <strong>children</strong>, which tended to decrease with<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
<strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> age. About 83% <strong>of</strong> the mothers reported that they generally consult<br />
private practitioner, while 16% visit PHCs to seek treatment for their sick <strong>children</strong>.<br />
The overall prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>nutrition (
1. INTRODUCTION<br />
India, <strong>in</strong> the past few decades, has witnessed rapid progress <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>dustrialization and agricultural production. Yet malnutrition, especially<br />
<strong>under</strong>nutrition cont<strong>in</strong>ues to be a major problem <strong>of</strong> public health significance <strong>in</strong> the<br />
country. It is a major contributor to high rates <strong>of</strong> childhood mortality, maternal<br />
mortality and morbidities <strong>in</strong> the community 1 . Though, poverty is a major <strong>under</strong>ly<strong>in</strong>g<br />
cause, scores <strong>of</strong> other factors such as socio-demographic, socio-cultural and lifestyle<br />
practices contribute significantly to the problem <strong>of</strong> malnutrition.<br />
Prevalence <strong>of</strong> low birth weight, ma<strong>in</strong>ly due to <strong>in</strong>trauter<strong>in</strong>e growth retardation<br />
cont<strong>in</strong>ues to be high, which is attributable to maternal <strong>under</strong>nutrition. This is further<br />
aggravated by <strong>in</strong>appropriate <strong>in</strong>fant and young child feed<strong>in</strong>g practices, such as<br />
discard<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> colostrum, delayed <strong>in</strong>itiation <strong>of</strong> breast feed<strong>in</strong>g, early or delayed<br />
<strong>in</strong>itiation <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g, and sub-optimal complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g<br />
practices <strong>in</strong> terms <strong>of</strong> type <strong>of</strong> feed, quantity, and frequency.<br />
It has been found that non-exclusive breast feed<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the first six months <strong>of</strong><br />
life results <strong>in</strong> 1.4 million deaths and 10% <strong>of</strong> the disease burden among <strong>in</strong>fants and<br />
young <strong>children</strong> every <strong>year</strong> <strong>in</strong> the develop<strong>in</strong>g countries 2 . It is also estimated that about<br />
10-15% <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong> <strong>five</strong> <strong>year</strong> deaths <strong>in</strong> resource poor countries could be prevented by<br />
achiev<strong>in</strong>g 90% <strong>of</strong> exclusive breast feed<strong>in</strong>g alone 3 and 22% <strong>of</strong> neonatal deaths could<br />
be prevented if breast feed<strong>in</strong>g is <strong>in</strong>itiated with<strong>in</strong> the first hour <strong>of</strong> birth 4 .<br />
About 21% <strong>of</strong> global deaths and DALYs (Disability Adjusted Life Years) <strong>in</strong><br />
<strong>children</strong> younger than 5 <strong>year</strong>s are attributed to stunt<strong>in</strong>g, severe wast<strong>in</strong>g, and<br />
<strong>in</strong>trauter<strong>in</strong>e growth retardation. Long term consequences <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>nutrition dur<strong>in</strong>g the<br />
early stages <strong>of</strong> child growth and development <strong>in</strong>clude likelihood <strong>of</strong> short stature <strong>in</strong><br />
adult life, low educational achievements, giv<strong>in</strong>g birth to smaller <strong>children</strong>, lower<br />
economic status and reduced physical work capacity and productivity <strong>in</strong> adulthood 5 .<br />
Further, the country is pass<strong>in</strong>g through a phase <strong>of</strong> rapid socio-economic<br />
transition lead<strong>in</strong>g to over nutrition <strong>in</strong> certa<strong>in</strong> segments <strong>of</strong> the population, especially <strong>in</strong><br />
the urban communities. Chang<strong>in</strong>g lifestyles and dietary habits are contribut<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
<strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> the prevalence <strong>of</strong> overweight/obesity among <strong>children</strong> and young adults<br />
expos<strong>in</strong>g them to the risk <strong>of</strong> chronic degenerative disorders such as hypertension,<br />
Type 2 diabetes, coronary artery disease, stroke, cancers etc <strong>in</strong> the later part <strong>of</strong> life.<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
More over <strong>under</strong>nutrition dur<strong>in</strong>g early childhood can lead to overweight/obesity <strong>in</strong><br />
adulthood, a risk factor for diet related chronic diseases 6 .<br />
The major nutritional problems <strong>of</strong> public health significance <strong>in</strong> the country are,<br />
prote<strong>in</strong> energy malnutrition (PEM), vitam<strong>in</strong> A deficiency (VAD), iron deficiency<br />
anaemia (IDA), and iod<strong>in</strong>e deficiency disorders (IDD). Preschool <strong>children</strong>, adolescent<br />
girls, women <strong>of</strong> reproductive age group, elderly, those belong<strong>in</strong>g to socioeconomically<br />
backward groups such as scheduled caste and schedule tribe<br />
communities, communities resid<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> chronically drought affected <strong>rural</strong> areas are<br />
nutritionally the most vulnerable segments <strong>of</strong> the populations.<br />
Several nutrition programmes have been designed and are be<strong>in</strong>g<br />
implemented <strong>in</strong> India, through respective State Governments, dur<strong>in</strong>g the past few<br />
decades for the prevention and control <strong>of</strong> both macro and micronutrient malnutrition<br />
<strong>in</strong> the population. They <strong>in</strong>clude supplementary feed<strong>in</strong>g through ICDS, distribution <strong>of</strong><br />
iron and folic acid tablets, massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A supplementation, Mid-day meal<br />
programme etc. Also, several poverty alleviation and developmental programmes<br />
are be<strong>in</strong>g implemented by central and State governments, for the overall<br />
socioeconomic development <strong>of</strong> the communities. In addition, Public Distribution<br />
System and TPDS are striv<strong>in</strong>g to provide essential commodities at affordable price,<br />
especially to those below poverty l<strong>in</strong>e throughout the <strong>year</strong>, all over the country, to<br />
ensure household food security.<br />
Children, who are subjected to socio-economic and dietary constra<strong>in</strong>ts dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />
their critical <strong>year</strong>s <strong>of</strong> growth and development, end up as adults with small body size.<br />
Such adults may be apparently healthy, but there is evidence to suggest that their<br />
productivity and earn<strong>in</strong>g capacity are impaired (Satyanarayana and Naidu, 1977 7 ).<br />
Repeat surveys by National Nutrition Monitor<strong>in</strong>g Bureau (1999 8 ) <strong>in</strong> eight States<br />
revealed that, despite very little or no change <strong>in</strong> the dietary <strong>in</strong>takes <strong>of</strong> <strong>rural</strong> population<br />
over a period <strong>of</strong> time, there was a decrease <strong>in</strong> the prevalence <strong>of</strong> severe forms <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>under</strong>nutrition among young <strong>children</strong> with concomitant <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>in</strong> normal grades.<br />
However, the proportion <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> with mild to moderate <strong>under</strong>nutrition rema<strong>in</strong>ed<br />
similar. Recent survey carried out by NNMB (2006 9 ) <strong>in</strong> the <strong>rural</strong> areas <strong>of</strong> n<strong>in</strong>e States<br />
revealed that about 40% <strong>under</strong> 5 <strong>year</strong> <strong>children</strong> were <strong>under</strong>weight, 45% were stunted<br />
and 20% were wasted. The correspond<strong>in</strong>g figures for the State <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh<br />
were, 46%, 59% and 24% respectively.<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Accord<strong>in</strong>g to NFHS-3 10 , <strong>in</strong> the State <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh, 60% <strong>of</strong>
The results <strong>of</strong> the study carried out <strong>in</strong> Ujja<strong>in</strong> district <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh State<br />
dur<strong>in</strong>g February-August 2010, is presented <strong>in</strong> this report.<br />
1.1 Pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> Ujja<strong>in</strong> District<br />
The Ujja<strong>in</strong> district is bounded by the districts <strong>of</strong> Shajapur to the northeast and<br />
east, Indore to the south, Dewas to the southeast, Dhar to the southwest, and<br />
Ratlam to the west and northwest. The total area <strong>of</strong> District is 6091 sq.Km. with a<br />
population <strong>of</strong> 17,09,885 (2001 census), with a population density <strong>of</strong> 281/sq.km. The<br />
district has a sex ratio <strong>of</strong> 940. The District literacy rate is 71.2 with 57.9 females.<br />
Largely depends on the ra<strong>in</strong>fall for its cultivation. The pr<strong>in</strong>cipal crops <strong>in</strong> the District<br />
are Wheat, Maize, and Jowar.<br />
2. OBJECTIVES<br />
2.1 General Objective<br />
The general objective <strong>of</strong> the study was to assess the health and nutritional<br />
status <strong>of</strong>
3.1.2 Selection <strong>of</strong> Villages<br />
For the purpose <strong>of</strong> survey, <strong>in</strong> each district, a total <strong>of</strong> 20 villages were selected,<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g systematic random procedure, cover<strong>in</strong>g all the taluks/blocks based on<br />
Population Proportion to Size <strong>of</strong> the village.<br />
3.1.3 Selection <strong>of</strong> Households<br />
In each <strong>of</strong> the selected villages, a total <strong>of</strong> 20 households (HHs) hav<strong>in</strong>g at<br />
least one <strong>in</strong>dex child <strong>of</strong>
3.2.4 History <strong>of</strong> Morbidity<br />
Information on history <strong>of</strong> morbidity among the <strong>children</strong> such as fever,<br />
respiratory <strong>in</strong>fection, diarrhoea etc., if any, dur<strong>in</strong>g the preced<strong>in</strong>g 15 days <strong>of</strong> visit was<br />
collected.<br />
3.2.5 Maternal Particulars<br />
Maternal particulars such as parity, antenatal care, TT immunization, receipt<br />
<strong>of</strong> IFA tablets, particulars <strong>of</strong> delivery and record<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> birth weight were collected on<br />
mothers <strong>of</strong>
pr<strong>of</strong>iciency <strong>in</strong> local language were recruited, tra<strong>in</strong>ed and standardized <strong>in</strong> various<br />
survey methodologies, by the scientists from the National Institute <strong>of</strong> Nutrition. All<br />
the survey <strong>in</strong>struments (pr<strong>of</strong>ormae) were developed, translated <strong>in</strong>to h<strong>in</strong>di vernacular<br />
and pre-tested before be<strong>in</strong>g used <strong>in</strong> the survey. Data was collected <strong>in</strong> each district<br />
by two teams.<br />
3.4 Quality Control<br />
Random checks were carried out by scientists from NIN, periodically by<br />
revisit<strong>in</strong>g the households surveyed by the field staff, to ensure quality <strong>of</strong> data<br />
collection.<br />
3.5 Data Analysis<br />
The data was scrut<strong>in</strong>ized and entered <strong>in</strong>to the computers as soon as it was<br />
received at NIN. The data clean<strong>in</strong>g was done by carry<strong>in</strong>g out range and consistency<br />
checks. Descriptive and analytical statistics <strong>of</strong> the data were carried out us<strong>in</strong>g SPSS<br />
W<strong>in</strong>dows version 15.0. Appropriate statistical tools were used wherever needed.<br />
4. RESULTS<br />
4.1 Coverage<br />
A total <strong>of</strong> 396 households from 20 villages were covered for the study (Table<br />
1). A total <strong>of</strong> 464 <strong>children</strong> (Boys:246; Girls:218)
4.2.1 Community<br />
About 44% <strong>of</strong> households covered for survey belonged to backward<br />
communities, while 23% belonged to other communities. Scheduled Caste and<br />
Scheduled Tribe population accounted for 31% and 3% respectively.<br />
4.2.2 Type <strong>of</strong> family<br />
About 40% were nuclear families and 45% were jo<strong>in</strong>t families, while the<br />
rema<strong>in</strong><strong>in</strong>g 15% were extended nuclear families.<br />
4.2.3 Family size<br />
The average family size was 6.9. About 22% <strong>of</strong> the HHs had family size <strong>of</strong> ≤<br />
4 members, 61% had 5-9, and 17% <strong>of</strong> HHs had ≥10 members.<br />
4.2.4 Literacy status <strong>of</strong> father<br />
About 69% <strong>of</strong> the fathers <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>dex <strong>children</strong> were literates. About 32% had<br />
an education level <strong>of</strong> 8-10 th class, about 22% had school<strong>in</strong>g up to 5 th class, about 6%<br />
each were studied up to <strong>in</strong>termediate and 6-7 th class, while 4% had an education<br />
level <strong>of</strong> graduation & above.<br />
4.2.5 Literacy status <strong>of</strong> mother<br />
About 45% <strong>of</strong> the mothers <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>dex <strong>children</strong> were literates. About 12% had<br />
an education <strong>of</strong> 8-10 th class, 25% had school<strong>in</strong>g up to 5 th class, 5% were studied<br />
upto 6-7 th class, and only 2% were educated up to <strong>in</strong>termediate and above.<br />
4.2.6 Household landhold<strong>in</strong>g<br />
About 47% <strong>of</strong> households did not posses any agricultural land, about 24%<br />
were large farmers (≥ 5 acres), 17% were small farmers (2.5 - 5 acres), while 13%<br />
were marg<strong>in</strong>al farmers (
4.2.9 Per capita monthly <strong>in</strong>come<br />
The average monthly per capita <strong>in</strong>come (PCI) <strong>of</strong> HHs was Rs 586. About 39%<br />
had average PCI <strong>of</strong> Rs.
each had ANC at PHC/CHC or private cl<strong>in</strong>ic, 14% each <strong>of</strong> mothers had ANCs at<br />
Anganwadi Center (AWC) or sub-center.<br />
In about 74% <strong>of</strong> cases, the ANCs were conducted by either Medical <strong>of</strong>ficers<br />
(40.6%) or by ANM (33.3%). In about 19% <strong>of</strong> cases, the ANCs were conducted by<br />
Private doctors. Major components <strong>of</strong> ANC <strong>in</strong>cluded physical exam<strong>in</strong>ation (85.7%),<br />
weight record<strong>in</strong>g (81%), haemoglob<strong>in</strong> estimation (73.8%), ur<strong>in</strong>e exam<strong>in</strong>ation (71.4%),<br />
and blood pressure measurement (69%). About 64% each <strong>of</strong> the women received<br />
advice from health personnel to consume more green leafy vegetables, attend ANCs<br />
regularly and consume more vegetables & fruits. About 69% <strong>of</strong> women were advised to<br />
consume IFA tablets dur<strong>in</strong>g pregnancy.<br />
About 93% <strong>of</strong> pregnant women received IFA tablets. While, about 50% received<br />
≥90 tablets, only 33% consumed ≥ 90 tablets dur<strong>in</strong>g the pregnancy. The IFA tablets<br />
were received mostly from ANM (28.6%) and AWW (27.1%). About 93% <strong>of</strong> the mothers<br />
reportedly received two doses <strong>of</strong> TT, while 5% received one dose.<br />
4.5.3 Particulars <strong>of</strong> last Delivery (Mothers hav<strong>in</strong>g
4.6.2 Infant and Young child feed<strong>in</strong>g practices (IYCF)<br />
4.6.2.1 0-11 month <strong>children</strong><br />
Information on breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g and complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g practices with<br />
respect to
70<br />
60<br />
%<br />
Fig.1 Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0-11 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
Time <strong>of</strong> Initiation <strong>of</strong> Breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g (BF)<br />
59.1<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
9.1<br />
13.6<br />
7.3<br />
10.9<br />
0<br />
currently given <strong>in</strong>cluded homemade semi-solids (75%), cow/buffalo milk (72.1%) &<br />
home made solids (71%). The most commonly used food groups <strong>in</strong>cluded were<br />
cereals & millets, pulses, roots & tubers, fats & oils, fruits, GLV, other vegetables,<br />
Milk & milk products, fruits (about 37-86%), eggs (32.7%) and flesh foods (19.7%).<br />
About 5% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> were fed ≥ 4 times a day, 66% were fed 3 times a day,<br />
while 27% were fed ≤ 2 times a day. About 59% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> consumed food<br />
themselves mostly with hands. About 34% <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> were fed by their mothers. The<br />
feed<strong>in</strong>g was supervised by their mothers (78.4%) (Table 13).<br />
4.6.3 Care <strong>of</strong> the Child<br />
About 77% <strong>of</strong> mothers were reportedly tak<strong>in</strong>g care <strong>of</strong> their <strong>children</strong> by themselves at<br />
home, while 18% were cared by either the grand parents or by the older sibl<strong>in</strong>gs. About<br />
4% <strong>of</strong> the mothers carried their <strong>children</strong> to the work-spot (Table 14).<br />
4.6.4 Personal Hygiene<br />
About 38% <strong>of</strong> mothers washed their hands with soap before feed<strong>in</strong>g the child.<br />
About half (50.2%) were us<strong>in</strong>g soap for wash<strong>in</strong>g their hands after defecation (Table<br />
14).<br />
4.6.5 History <strong>of</strong> Morbidity<br />
The particulars <strong>of</strong> morbidity dur<strong>in</strong>g preced<strong>in</strong>g fortnight among
A majority <strong>of</strong> the mothers <strong>in</strong> general stated that, they consult a private practitioner<br />
(83.4%), while the rest visited the PHC (16.4%), when the <strong>children</strong> fall sick, (Table 16).<br />
About 19% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> reportedly had diarrhoea dur<strong>in</strong>g the previous fortnight and<br />
about 20% received ORS, either home made or that given by ANM/AWW or commercial<br />
ORS. About 44% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> reportedly had acute respiratory <strong>in</strong>fection and only 3%<br />
had received co-trimoxazole.<br />
4.6.6 Participation <strong>in</strong> ICDS Supplementary feed<strong>in</strong>g Programme.<br />
About 94% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> <strong>of</strong> 6-59 months age group were participat<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> the<br />
ICDS supplementary feed<strong>in</strong>g programme, with 75% be<strong>in</strong>g regular. The extent <strong>of</strong><br />
participation was observed to be high (97%) among 36-59 months compared to 93%<br />
among 6-35 months age group (Table 17). A higher proportion <strong>of</strong> older <strong>children</strong> (36-<br />
59 months) were regular (86%), than their younger counterparts (69%).<br />
4.6.7 Coverage for Immunization <strong>under</strong> UIP<br />
The particulars <strong>of</strong> coverage <strong>of</strong> 12-24 months <strong>children</strong> for immunization <strong>under</strong><br />
Universal Immunization Programme (UIP) dur<strong>in</strong>g the first <strong>year</strong> <strong>of</strong> life are provided <strong>in</strong><br />
Table 18 and Fig. 3. About 90% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong> were fully immunized, 8% were<br />
partially immunized and 2% were not immunized. About 94-98% received BCG, DPT<br />
and OPV, while 91% received measles. Major source <strong>of</strong> this <strong>in</strong>formation was from<br />
parents (73.7%), followed by mother and child protection card (22.8%), and<br />
immunization card (1.8%).<br />
4.6.8 Coverage for Massive dose <strong>of</strong> Vitam<strong>in</strong> A Supplementation<br />
The National programme on Prevention and control <strong>of</strong> bl<strong>in</strong>dness due to Vitam<strong>in</strong><br />
A deficiency envisages that all the <strong>children</strong> between 9 to 60 months should receive<br />
biannual massive dose <strong>of</strong> vitam<strong>in</strong> A. The particulars <strong>of</strong> coverage <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> for<br />
massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A dur<strong>in</strong>g the previous one <strong>year</strong> are provided <strong>in</strong> Table 19. In<br />
general, about 85% <strong>of</strong> 9-59 months <strong>children</strong> reportedly received at least one dose <strong>of</strong><br />
vitam<strong>in</strong> A. While, the coverage was about 82-89% among 18-59 months <strong>children</strong>,<br />
about 84% <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> <strong>of</strong> 9-17 months received massive dose <strong>of</strong> vitam<strong>in</strong> A. About 74-<br />
85% <strong>of</strong> 18-59 months <strong>children</strong> received 2 doses dur<strong>in</strong>g preced<strong>in</strong>g one <strong>year</strong>, and 4-<br />
8% received one dose only. In a majority <strong>of</strong> cases, the massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A was<br />
adm<strong>in</strong>istered at AWC (82.2%), mostly either by AWW (56.6%) or ANM (26.4%). The<br />
major reasons for non-receipt <strong>of</strong> massive dose <strong>of</strong> Vitam<strong>in</strong> A were ‘not <strong>of</strong>fered’<br />
(6.1%), ‘unaware <strong>of</strong> need (3.2%).<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
%<br />
100<br />
Fig. 3 Coverage (%) <strong>of</strong> 12-24 months Children for Immunization <strong>under</strong><br />
Universal Immunization Program (UIP)<br />
90<br />
98.2<br />
98.2<br />
96.5<br />
94.7<br />
96.5 95.6 93.9<br />
80<br />
91.2<br />
90.3<br />
70<br />
60<br />
50<br />
40<br />
30<br />
20<br />
10<br />
7.9<br />
1.8<br />
0<br />
BCG DPT1 DPT2 DPT3 OPV1 OPV2 OPV3 Measles Full Imm. Partial<br />
Imm.<br />
Not imm.<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
4.6.9 Coverage for Iron and Folic acid tablets Supplementation<br />
About 25% <strong>children</strong> <strong>of</strong> 12-59 months reportedly received IFA tablets dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />
the preced<strong>in</strong>g <strong>year</strong>, either from AWW (21.5%) or ANM (4%). None <strong>of</strong> the <strong>children</strong><br />
received and consumed ≥ 90 IFA tablets (Table 20).<br />
4.7 <strong>Nutritional</strong> status <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> (
20<br />
16<br />
Fig.4 Distance charts for Weights - Boys<br />
Median Wt - WHO Standards<br />
Mean Wt - Current Study<br />
Wt (Kgs)<br />
12<br />
8<br />
4<br />
0<br />
0<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
10<br />
11<br />
12-17<br />
18-23<br />
24-29<br />
30-35<br />
36-41<br />
42-47<br />
48-53<br />
54-59<br />
Age (Months)<br />
20<br />
16<br />
Fig.5 Distance charts for Weights - Girls<br />
Median Wt - WHO Standards<br />
Mean Wt - Current Study<br />
Wt (Kgs)<br />
12<br />
8<br />
4<br />
0<br />
0<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
10<br />
11<br />
Age (Months)<br />
12-17<br />
18-23<br />
24-29<br />
30-35<br />
36-41<br />
42-47<br />
48-53<br />
54-59<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
120<br />
100<br />
Fig.6 Distance charts for Heights - Boys<br />
Meadian Ht-WHO standards<br />
Mean Ht -Current Study<br />
80<br />
Ht (Cms)<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
0<br />
0<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
10<br />
11<br />
12-17<br />
18-23<br />
24-29<br />
30-35<br />
36-41<br />
42-47<br />
48-53<br />
54-59<br />
Age (Months)<br />
120<br />
100<br />
Fig.7 Distance charts for Heights - Girls<br />
Meadian Ht-WHO standards<br />
Mean Ht -Current Study<br />
80<br />
Ht (Cms)<br />
60<br />
40<br />
20<br />
0<br />
0<br />
1<br />
2<br />
3<br />
4<br />
5<br />
6<br />
7<br />
8<br />
9<br />
10<br />
11<br />
Age (Months)<br />
12-17<br />
18-23<br />
24-29<br />
30-35<br />
36-41<br />
42-47<br />
48-53<br />
54-59<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Fig.8 Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> Undernutrition among
Stunt<strong>in</strong>g<br />
In general, about 40% <strong>of</strong>
Fig.10 Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> Undernutrition among
Type <strong>of</strong> Family<br />
The prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight, though not statistically significant, was higher<br />
among nuclear & extended families (49%) compared to those liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> jo<strong>in</strong>t families<br />
(41%). The prevalence <strong>of</strong> stunt<strong>in</strong>g was significantly (p
Fig.11 Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> Undernutrition among
from landless households (30%) compared to to those possess<strong>in</strong>g land (24%).<br />
However, these differences were not statistically significant (Fig.13).<br />
Occupation <strong>of</strong> father<br />
The prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight was significantly (p
Fig.13 Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> Undernutrition among
Fig.15 Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> Undernutrition ` among
41% respectively), compared to those liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> pucca houses (37% & 28%<br />
respectively). Similarly, the prevalence <strong>of</strong> wast<strong>in</strong>g was higher among those liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />
kutcha houses (32%) compared to those liv<strong>in</strong>g semi pucca (25%) or pucca houses<br />
(22%) (Fig.16). However, none <strong>of</strong> the differences were found to be statistically<br />
significant.<br />
Source <strong>of</strong> dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g water<br />
Though not statistically significant, the prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight and stunt<strong>in</strong>g<br />
was lower among those <strong>children</strong> from households with tap/tube as source <strong>of</strong> dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g<br />
water (44% & 39% respectively) compared to those us<strong>in</strong>g ‘other’ sources (58% &<br />
50% respectively). However, the differences were statistically not significant. The<br />
prevalence <strong>of</strong> wast<strong>in</strong>g was similar among those <strong>children</strong> from households with<br />
tap/tube as source <strong>of</strong> dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g water (27%) and others (28%).<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> cook<strong>in</strong>g fuel<br />
The prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight, though not statistically significant, was higher<br />
among <strong>children</strong> from HHs us<strong>in</strong>g firewood as cook<strong>in</strong>g fuel (46%), compared to those<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g ‘other’ fuels (36%). On the other hand, the prevalence <strong>of</strong> stunt<strong>in</strong>g was lower<br />
among <strong>children</strong> from HHs us<strong>in</strong>g firewood as cook<strong>in</strong>g fuels (39%), compared to HHs<br />
us<strong>in</strong>g as ‘other’ cook<strong>in</strong>g fuel (46%). The prevalence <strong>of</strong> wast<strong>in</strong>g was significantly<br />
(p
prevalence <strong>of</strong> wast<strong>in</strong>g, though not significant was lower among <strong>children</strong> <strong>of</strong> those<br />
households us<strong>in</strong>g sanitary latr<strong>in</strong>es (20%), compared to those not us<strong>in</strong>g or not hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />
sanitary latr<strong>in</strong>es (28%).<br />
Separate Kitchen<br />
The prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight and wast<strong>in</strong>g was higher among <strong>children</strong> from<br />
HHs who did not have separate kitchen (48% & 30% respectively) compared to<br />
those hav<strong>in</strong>g separate kitchen (41% & 23% respectively). However, the differences<br />
were statistically not significant. The prevalence <strong>of</strong> stunt<strong>in</strong>g was similar among<br />
<strong>children</strong> from HHs who did not have separate kitchen (40%) and to those hav<strong>in</strong>g<br />
separate kitchen (39%).<br />
History <strong>of</strong> Morbidity dur<strong>in</strong>g preced<strong>in</strong>g fortnight<br />
No significant difference was observed <strong>in</strong> the prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight, and<br />
stunt<strong>in</strong>g among <strong>children</strong> with history <strong>of</strong> morbidity (such as fever, diarrhoea, respiratory<br />
<strong>in</strong>fections etc) <strong>in</strong> the preced<strong>in</strong>g fortnight and those <strong>children</strong> with no history <strong>of</strong> morbidity.<br />
The prevalence <strong>of</strong> wast<strong>in</strong>g was significantly (p
5. DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS<br />
National population policy 2000 envisaged that 80% <strong>of</strong> deliveries should be<br />
Institutional and 100% should be conducted by tra<strong>in</strong>ed personnel 16 . The study<br />
revealed that about 93% <strong>of</strong> pregnant women had <strong>under</strong>gone antenatal check-up,<br />
55% had at least three ANCs and 98% received TT immunization. Accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
NFHS-3 survey, about 80% <strong>of</strong> the pregnant women had <strong>under</strong>gone ANC <strong>in</strong> the state<br />
<strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh 10 . About 76% deliveries took place either <strong>in</strong> Government or<br />
Private hospitals and about 69% were conducted by medical doctors.<br />
Birth weights were recorded on about 80% <strong>of</strong> the newborns and the records<br />
were available for 63% <strong>in</strong>fants. The proportion <strong>of</strong> low birth weight (LBW) was about<br />
40% <strong>in</strong> the district. The birth weight <strong>of</strong> an <strong>in</strong>fant is the s<strong>in</strong>gle most important<br />
determ<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>of</strong> new born survival and <strong>in</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g countries. Low birth weight<br />
<strong>in</strong>fants are at <strong>in</strong>creased risk <strong>of</strong> be<strong>in</strong>g malnourished at one <strong>year</strong> <strong>of</strong> age, become<br />
victims <strong>of</strong> “<strong>in</strong>fection-malnutrition cycle” which leads to further physical stunt<strong>in</strong>g and<br />
impaired growth and development 17 . In addition, <strong>children</strong> born with <strong>in</strong>trauter<strong>in</strong>e<br />
growth retardation are at a higher risk <strong>of</strong> develop<strong>in</strong>g overweight/obesity and<br />
associated chronic degenerative disorders dur<strong>in</strong>g adulthood 6 .<br />
Infant and young child feed<strong>in</strong>g practices have a significant impact on child<br />
health and survival. Appropriate feed<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>clud<strong>in</strong>g early and exclusive breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g<br />
and optimal complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g practices such as appropriate time <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiation,<br />
right type and quantity <strong>of</strong> complementary foods and frequency <strong>of</strong> complementary<br />
feed<strong>in</strong>g is important for proper physical growth and mental development <strong>of</strong> the child.<br />
In its policy statements, the American Academy <strong>of</strong> Paediatrics (1997) 18 stated that<br />
the mother’s milk is uniquely superior for <strong>in</strong>fant feed<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
Epidemiological research showed that mother’s milk and breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>in</strong>fants provides advantages with regard to general health, growth and development,<br />
while, significantly decreas<strong>in</strong>g risk for a large number <strong>of</strong> acute and chronic diseases.<br />
In this study, breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g was the common practice among the mothers. About 9%<br />
<strong>of</strong> the mothers reportedly <strong>in</strong>itiated breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g with<strong>in</strong> one hour after delivery which<br />
is lower to that reported by the NFHS-3 for the State (16%), while 59% <strong>of</strong> the<br />
mothers <strong>in</strong>itiated breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g between 1-3 hours. Pre-lacteals were given <strong>in</strong> about<br />
21% <strong>of</strong> the newborns. This f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g is not encourag<strong>in</strong>g as Pre-lacteal feeds might<br />
harm the immature gut <strong>of</strong> the child, especially if they are contam<strong>in</strong>ated and early<br />
<strong>in</strong>itiation <strong>of</strong> breast feed<strong>in</strong>g is the primary determ<strong>in</strong>ant <strong>of</strong> maternal milk production and<br />
secretion. Avoidance <strong>of</strong> other fluids or foods is essential to optimize breast milk<br />
<strong>in</strong>take by the newborn. Most <strong>of</strong> the other fluids or foods are less nutritious than<br />
breast milk and therefore, if displacement occurs, the <strong>in</strong>fant may be at a nutritional<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
disadvantage even if prepared hygienically 19 . In many communities, it is traditionally<br />
believed that colostrum is unhealthy and therefore is harmful to the baby. However <strong>in</strong><br />
the present study, colostrum was given by majority (85.5%) <strong>of</strong> mothers which is good<br />
for the child’s health and nutrition and such desirable practices should be<br />
encouraged <strong>in</strong> the community.<br />
Breast milk can contribute significantly as a source <strong>of</strong> energy, fat, high quality<br />
prote<strong>in</strong> and micronutrients, especially when the quality <strong>of</strong> available complementary<br />
food is low (Academy <strong>of</strong> Educational Development, 1999 19 ). WHO 20 and UNICEF<br />
(1993a 21 ) recommends that complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g should be <strong>in</strong>itiated immediately<br />
after 6 months <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>fant’s age and breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g should be cont<strong>in</strong>ued well <strong>in</strong>to<br />
the second <strong>year</strong> <strong>of</strong> life and for longer duration, if possible. In this study, the mothers<br />
cont<strong>in</strong>ued to breastfeed for a longer duration (up to 2 <strong>year</strong>s), however undesirable<br />
complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g practices appear to be significant <strong>in</strong> the district <strong>of</strong> Ujja<strong>in</strong> <strong>in</strong><br />
terms <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>itiation and frequency <strong>of</strong> feed<strong>in</strong>g.<br />
The <strong>in</strong>itiation <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g was unduly delayed. About 35% <strong>of</strong><br />
the 6-11 months <strong>children</strong> were gett<strong>in</strong>g complementary feeds, while only 9% started<br />
receiv<strong>in</strong>g the same at the age <strong>of</strong> 6 months. The complementary foods be<strong>in</strong>g given<br />
mostly <strong>in</strong>cluded formula milk, cow/buffalo milk and home made semi-solids. The<br />
frequency <strong>of</strong> feed<strong>in</strong>g was at least 3 times <strong>in</strong> 16% <strong>of</strong> the <strong>in</strong>fants. Effective<br />
immunization programme aga<strong>in</strong>st the common communicable diseases are required<br />
for the majority <strong>of</strong> the susceptible populations particularly <strong>in</strong> the develop<strong>in</strong>g<br />
countries, where<strong>in</strong> the risk <strong>of</strong> disability or death from preventable <strong>in</strong>fectious diseases<br />
is a matter <strong>of</strong> concern. Therefore, coverage <strong>under</strong> universal immunization<br />
programme should be 100%. The coverage for complete immunization is about 90%<br />
<strong>in</strong> this district.<br />
The programme for prevention <strong>of</strong> bl<strong>in</strong>dness due to vitam<strong>in</strong> A deficiency<br />
envisages distribution <strong>of</strong> massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A to all the <strong>children</strong> aged between 9-<br />
59 months, every 6 months. It was observed that about 84% <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> between 9-<br />
17 months and about 82-89% <strong>children</strong> between 18-59 months received at least one<br />
dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A dur<strong>in</strong>g previous one <strong>year</strong>. About 74-85% <strong>of</strong> 18-59 months <strong>children</strong><br />
received the suggested two doses dur<strong>in</strong>g the preced<strong>in</strong>g one <strong>year</strong>. The coverage for<br />
iron-folic acid supplementation was very low (25%), while only 1% received 60-90<br />
tablets <strong>in</strong>dicat<strong>in</strong>g, poor coverage. Low compliance (less than 1% consumed 60-90<br />
tablets) <strong>in</strong>dicates weak education component. There is a need to strengthen the<br />
service delivery and monitor<strong>in</strong>g mechanisms for these programmes.<br />
The common morbidities such as ARI, fever and diarrhoea were reported by the<br />
mothers with the prevalence be<strong>in</strong>g higher <strong>in</strong> the age group <strong>of</strong> 6-11 months and 12-23<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
months <strong>children</strong> as compared to the other age group. The probable reasons for this<br />
could be prevail<strong>in</strong>g suboptimal <strong>in</strong>fant and young child feed<strong>in</strong>g practices coupled with<br />
non-receipt <strong>of</strong> appropriate health care management.<br />
Consumption <strong>of</strong> adequately (≥15 ppm) Iodised salt is very high (78.8%) <strong>in</strong> the<br />
district compared to National figure (51%) and State <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh (36%)<br />
(NFHS-3). <strong>Nutritional</strong> status <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>fants and young <strong>children</strong> is not only a vital health<br />
issue, but it is also central to susta<strong>in</strong>able growth and development <strong>of</strong> the child 22 .In<br />
the present study, the prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>weight, stunt<strong>in</strong>g and wast<strong>in</strong>g was 45%,<br />
40% and 27% respectively. It was observed that the prevalence <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>nutrition<br />
<strong>in</strong>creased as <strong>in</strong>crease <strong>of</strong> age. Undernutrition <strong>in</strong> all its three forms cont<strong>in</strong>ues to be a<br />
significant problem <strong>in</strong> the district <strong>of</strong> Ujja<strong>in</strong>, even though the current prevalence <strong>in</strong> the<br />
district is lower than that reported for the State <strong>of</strong> Madhya Pradesh by NFHS-3<br />
(2007) and NNMB (2006). Probably, factors such as, the energy and nutrient density<br />
<strong>of</strong> the complementary foods given, the frequency and variety <strong>of</strong> foods <strong>of</strong>fered,<br />
hygiene aspects <strong>of</strong> food preparation, personal hygiene, the amount <strong>of</strong> breast milk<br />
consumed at different stages <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g, the frequency <strong>of</strong><br />
breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g and <strong>in</strong>appropriate complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g dur<strong>in</strong>g and after illness may<br />
have an important contributory role for the observed high prevalence <strong>of</strong><br />
<strong>under</strong>nutrition <strong>in</strong> the district.<br />
The study revealed significant association between nutritional status and<br />
different socio-economic variables which <strong>in</strong>dicate higher rates <strong>of</strong> <strong>under</strong>nutrition<br />
among HH <strong>of</strong> vulnerable section <strong>of</strong> society (SC & ST), among <strong>children</strong> <strong>of</strong> illiterate<br />
fathers, among <strong>children</strong> whose parents are <strong>in</strong>volved occupation such as labour and<br />
those not hav<strong>in</strong>g facility <strong>of</strong> sanitary latr<strong>in</strong>e. Promotion <strong>of</strong> better <strong>in</strong>fant and young child<br />
feed<strong>in</strong>g practices, improv<strong>in</strong>g distribution and consumption <strong>of</strong> IFA tablets dur<strong>in</strong>g<br />
pregnancy and improv<strong>in</strong>g ICDS supplementation among 6-59 months <strong>children</strong> is<br />
needed for improv<strong>in</strong>g the health and nutritional status <strong>of</strong> young <strong>children</strong>.<br />
Last but not the least, there is a need to augment the programmes for <strong>in</strong>come<br />
generation to enhance household food and nutrition security.<br />
- o0o -<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
REFERENCES<br />
1. de Onis M, Blossner M, Borghi E, Frongillo EA, Morris R. Estimates <strong>of</strong> global<br />
prevalence <strong>of</strong> childhood <strong>under</strong>weight <strong>in</strong> 1990 and 2015. JAMA 2004;<br />
291:2600-6.<br />
2. Black,RE, Allen LH, Bhutta ZA etal. Meternal and child <strong>under</strong>nutrition: global<br />
and regional exposures and health consequencies. Lancet 2008; 371: 243-260<br />
3. Jones G, Steketee RW, Black RE etal. How many child deaths can we prevent<br />
this <strong>year</strong> Lancet 2003; 362: 65-71.<br />
4. Edmond KM, Zandoh C, Quigley MA etal. Delayed breast feed<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong>itiation<br />
<strong>in</strong>creases risk <strong>of</strong> neonatal mortality. Pediatrics 2006; 117: e380-e386.<br />
5. Victora CG, Adair L, Fall C, Hallal PC, Martorell R, Ritcher L and Sachdev HS.<br />
Maternal and child <strong>under</strong>nutrition: Consequences for adult health and human<br />
capital. The Lancet 2008; 371:340-57.<br />
6. Barker DJP, Osmond C, Forsen TJ, Kajantie E, Eriksson JG. Trajectories <strong>of</strong><br />
growth among <strong>children</strong>who have coronary Events as Adults. N Eng J Med<br />
2005; 353:1802-9<br />
7. Satyanarayana K., Naidu AN., Chatterjee B., Rao BSN. Body size and work<br />
output. Am. J. Cl<strong>in</strong>. Nutr. 1977; 30:322-325.<br />
8. National Nutrition Monitor<strong>in</strong>g Bureau: Report <strong>of</strong> Second Repeat Survey –<br />
Rural. NNMB Tech. Rep. No. 18, 1999.<br />
9. National Nutrition Monitor<strong>in</strong>g Bureau. Diet and nutritional status <strong>of</strong> <strong>rural</strong><br />
population. NNMB Tech. Rep. No.24, National Institute <strong>of</strong> Nutrition (ICMR),<br />
Hyderabad, 2006<br />
10. National Family Health Survey 2005-06.<br />
11. M<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> Human Resource Development, Government <strong>of</strong> India, National<br />
Nutrition Policy, New Delhi: Department <strong>of</strong> Women and Child Development,<br />
1993.National Plan <strong>of</strong> action<br />
12. M<strong>in</strong>istry <strong>of</strong> Human Resource Development, Government <strong>of</strong> India, National Plan<br />
<strong>of</strong> Action on Nutrition, New Delhi: Food and Nutrition Board, Department <strong>of</strong><br />
Women and Child Development, 1995.<br />
13. Jelliffee D.B. <strong>Assessment</strong> <strong>of</strong> nutritional status <strong>of</strong> community. WHO Monograph<br />
series No.53, 1966.<br />
14. World Health Organization. Measur<strong>in</strong>g change <strong>in</strong> nutritional status, WHO,<br />
Geneva, 1983.<br />
15. WHO Multicentre Growth Reference Study Group. WHO Child Growth<br />
Standards based on length/height, weight and age. Acta Paediatr Suppl 2006;<br />
450:76-85.<br />
16. www.who<strong>in</strong>dia.org/EIP/policy/population...<br />
17. Black RE, L<strong>in</strong>dsay HA, Bhutta ZA, Caulfield LE, Mercedes de Onis, Majid<br />
Ezzati, Col<strong>in</strong> Mathers, Juan Rivera. Meternal and child <strong>under</strong> nutrition: Global<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
and regional exposures and health consequences. Maternal and child <strong>under</strong><br />
nutrition study group. The Lancet, 2008; 371:340-357.<br />
18. American Academy <strong>of</strong> Paediatrics. Breast-feed<strong>in</strong>g and the use <strong>of</strong> Human milk<br />
American Academy <strong>of</strong> Paediatrics, Work Group on Breastfeed<strong>in</strong>g. Pediatr<br />
1997; 100:1035-1039.<br />
19. Academy <strong>of</strong> educational development. Recommended feed<strong>in</strong>g and dietary<br />
practices to improve <strong>in</strong>fant and maternal nutrition. L<strong>in</strong>kages – Improv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
nutrition and reproductive health. 1999.<br />
20. The optimal duration <strong>of</strong> exclusive breast-feed<strong>in</strong>g. Report <strong>of</strong> an Expert<br />
Consultation, WHO, Geneva, 2001.<br />
21. UNICEF. Breast feed<strong>in</strong>g facts <strong>of</strong> life. UNICEF (1993a).<br />
22. Dewey KG, He<strong>in</strong>ig MJ, Nommsen LA, Lonnerdal B. Adequacy <strong>of</strong> energy <strong>in</strong>take<br />
among breast-fed <strong>in</strong>fants <strong>in</strong> the DARLING study: relationship to growth<br />
velocity, morbidity and activity levels. Davis Area Research on Lactation, Infant<br />
Nutrition and Growth. J Pediatr.1991; 119:538-47.<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
TABLES
Table - 1<br />
Particulars <strong>of</strong> Coverage<br />
Particulars<br />
Coverage (n)<br />
Socio-economic particulars (HHs) 396<br />
Under 5 <strong>year</strong> <strong>children</strong> for anthropometry<br />
464<br />
(Boys: 246; Girls: 218)<br />
Children below 12 months 110<br />
Children 12-35 months 211<br />
Children 36-59 months 143<br />
Spot test<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> HHs salt for iod<strong>in</strong>e 396<br />
Infant & young child Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Mothers with
Table - 2<br />
Socio-economic Pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> the Households <strong>of</strong> Index <strong>children</strong><br />
Community<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> Family<br />
Family Size<br />
Particulars<br />
Percent<br />
n 396<br />
Scheduled Tribe 2.5<br />
Scheduled Caste 30.6<br />
Backward Community 43.7<br />
Others 23.2<br />
Nuclear 40.4<br />
Extended Nuclear 14.6<br />
Jo<strong>in</strong>t 45.0<br />
1 -4 21.7<br />
5 – 9 60.9<br />
≥ 10 17.4<br />
Average Family Size 6.9<br />
Literacy status <strong>of</strong> Father<br />
Literacy status <strong>of</strong> Mother<br />
Illiterate 31.1<br />
Read & write 0.8<br />
1 – 5 Class 21.5<br />
6 – 7 Class 5.6<br />
8 – 10 Class 31.6<br />
Intermediate 6.1<br />
Graduate & above 3.5<br />
Illiterate 55.1<br />
Read & write 1.0<br />
1 – 5 Class 24.7<br />
6 – 7 Class 4.8<br />
8 – 10 Class 12.1<br />
Intermediate 1.5<br />
Graduate & above 0.3<br />
(Contd….)<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 2 (Contd…)<br />
Socio-economic Pr<strong>of</strong>ile <strong>of</strong> the Households <strong>of</strong> Index <strong>children</strong><br />
Particulars<br />
Extent <strong>of</strong> HH landhold<strong>in</strong>g (Acres)<br />
Major Occupation <strong>of</strong> Father<br />
Major Occupation <strong>of</strong> Mother<br />
Per capita monthly <strong>in</strong>come (Rs)<br />
Percent<br />
n 396<br />
Nil 46.7<br />
Marg<strong>in</strong>al farmers
Table - 3<br />
Physical facilities <strong>of</strong> the Households<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> house<br />
Particulars<br />
Source <strong>of</strong> Dr<strong>in</strong>k<strong>in</strong>g Water<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> Cook<strong>in</strong>g Fuel<br />
Percent<br />
n 396<br />
Kutcha 33.8<br />
Semi Pucca 56.4<br />
Pucca 9.8<br />
Open Well 7.6<br />
Tube Well 86.4<br />
Tap 5.8<br />
Stream/River 0.3<br />
Firewood 94.3<br />
Kerosene 0.3<br />
Bio- Gas 0.3<br />
LPG 5.1<br />
Household electricity present 94.4<br />
Sanitary Latr<strong>in</strong>e<br />
Present and <strong>in</strong> use 19.9<br />
Present and not <strong>in</strong> use 2.0<br />
Absent 78.1<br />
Separate Kitchen Present 44.9<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 4<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> HHs accord<strong>in</strong>g to use <strong>of</strong> Iodized salt and iod<strong>in</strong>e content<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> salt used<br />
Iod<strong>in</strong>e Content<br />
Particulars<br />
Percent<br />
n 396<br />
Powdered salt 4.3<br />
Crystal Salt -<br />
Free-flow<strong>in</strong>g 95.7<br />
0 ppm 3.0<br />
Table - 6<br />
Particulars <strong>of</strong> last pregnancy <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong> < 6 months <strong>children</strong><br />
Particulars<br />
Percent<br />
n 42<br />
Undergone Antenatal check-up (ANC)<br />
Total number <strong>of</strong> ANCs<br />
Yes 92.9<br />
No 7.1<br />
One 2.4<br />
Two 35.7<br />
Three 28.6<br />
Four 14.9<br />
≥ <strong>five</strong> 11.9<br />
Not availed ANC 7.1<br />
Undergone First ANC at (Weeks <strong>of</strong> gestation)<br />
Place <strong>of</strong> ANC<br />
≤ 8 weeks 21.4<br />
9- 12 weeks 38.2<br />
13- 16 weeks 2.4<br />
17-20 weeks 9.5<br />
>20 weeks 21.4<br />
Not availed ANC 7.1<br />
Home 2.4<br />
AWC 14.3<br />
Sub-centre 14.3<br />
PHC/CHC 19.0<br />
Taluk/Dist.hospital 23.8<br />
Private Cl<strong>in</strong>ic 19.0<br />
Not availed ANC 7.1<br />
ANC conducted by<br />
LHV / ANM 33.3<br />
Medical Officer 40.6<br />
Pvt. Doctor 19.0<br />
Not availed ANC 7.1<br />
(Contd..)<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 6 (Contd…)<br />
Particulars <strong>of</strong> last pregnancy <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong> < 6 months <strong>children</strong><br />
Particulars<br />
Percent<br />
n 42<br />
Components <strong>of</strong> ANC*<br />
Physical Exam<strong>in</strong>ation 85.7<br />
Weight Record<strong>in</strong>g 81.0<br />
Ur<strong>in</strong>e Test 71.4<br />
Haemoglob<strong>in</strong> Estimation 73.8<br />
Blood pressure measurement 69.0<br />
Health & Nutrition advise given dur<strong>in</strong>g ANC<br />
Yes 71.4<br />
No 21.5<br />
Not availed ANC 7.1<br />
If yes, what advise*<br />
To attend for regular checkups 64.3<br />
To consume more GLVs 64.3<br />
To consume more Vegetables & fruits 64.3<br />
To take IFA tablets for 100 days 69.0<br />
Others 38.1<br />
Reasons for not avail<strong>in</strong>g ANCs*<br />
Not aware <strong>of</strong> the need 7.1<br />
No faith 7.1<br />
No ANC held <strong>in</strong> the village 7.1<br />
Inconvenience 7.1<br />
Loss <strong>of</strong> wage 7.1<br />
TT Immunization receiv<strong>in</strong>g<br />
Yes 97.6<br />
No 2.4<br />
If yes, No. <strong>of</strong> doses<br />
One dose 4.8<br />
Two doses 92.8<br />
Not received 2.4<br />
Reasons for not receiv<strong>in</strong>g TT<br />
Not aware <strong>of</strong> the need 2.4<br />
* Multiple responses ( Contd..)<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 6 (Contd…)<br />
Particulars <strong>of</strong> last pregnancy <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong> < 6 months <strong>children</strong><br />
Particulars<br />
Received IFA tablets<br />
IFA tablets received from<br />
No. <strong>of</strong> IFA tablets received<br />
No. <strong>of</strong> IFA tablets consumed<br />
Percent<br />
n 42<br />
Yes 92.9<br />
No 7.1<br />
ANM 28.6<br />
AWW 27.1<br />
MO-PHC 7.1<br />
Not received 7.1<br />
Table –7<br />
Particulars <strong>of</strong> last Delivery <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong>
Table - 8<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> < 60 months <strong>children</strong> accord<strong>in</strong>g <strong>of</strong> Birth order<br />
Birth order<br />
Percent<br />
n 464<br />
First 36.2<br />
Second 30.4<br />
Third 17.9<br />
Fourth 9.1<br />
Fifth and above 6.5<br />
Table - 9<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> < 60 months <strong>children</strong> hav<strong>in</strong>g sibl<strong>in</strong>gs accord<strong>in</strong>g to <strong>in</strong>terval<br />
between last two births<br />
Interval between last two births(months)<br />
Percent<br />
n 296<br />
Table - 10<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong>
Table - 11<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>fants (
Table - 12<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 6-11 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Percent<br />
n 68<br />
Foods generally <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> home made complementary foods*<br />
Cereals & Millets 11.8<br />
Pulses 16.2<br />
Green Leafy Vegetables 1.5<br />
Roots & Tubers 1.5<br />
Others vegetables 4.4<br />
Fruits 5.9<br />
Milk & milk products 14.7<br />
Eggs 1.5<br />
Meat & Chicken 35.3<br />
Fats & Oils 1.5<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> complementary feeds per day<br />
Mode <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g<br />
2 19.1<br />
3 11.8<br />
4 2.9<br />
5 1.5<br />
Not yet started 64.7<br />
Mother with spoon 4.4<br />
Mother with hand 27.9<br />
Self with spoon 1.5<br />
Self by hand 1.5<br />
Feed<strong>in</strong>g bottle -<br />
Not yet started 64.7<br />
Supervision <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g by<br />
* Multiple responses<br />
Mother 33.8<br />
Father 1.5<br />
Not yet started 64.7<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table - 13<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 12-35 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Percent<br />
n 208<br />
Children solely breast fed 1.9<br />
Children currently Breast fed + complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g 50.5<br />
Weaned 47.6<br />
Type <strong>of</strong> food currently be<strong>in</strong>g given*<br />
Cow/buffalo milk 72.1<br />
Formula milk 16.8<br />
Commercial baby food 12.0<br />
Home made semi-solids 75.0<br />
Home made solids 71.0<br />
Not yet started 1.9<br />
Foods generally <strong>in</strong>cluded <strong>in</strong> home made foods*<br />
Cereals & Millets 76.0<br />
Pulses & legumes 86.1<br />
Green Leafy Vegetables 57.7<br />
Other Vegetables 44.7<br />
Roots & Tubers 37.0<br />
Fruits 73.1<br />
Milk & milk products 56.7<br />
Eggs 32.7<br />
Flesh foods 19.7<br />
Fats & Oils 51.4<br />
Not yet started CF 1.9<br />
* Multiple responses ( Contd….)<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 13 (Contd…)<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 12-35 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to Feed<strong>in</strong>g (CF) Practices<br />
Feed<strong>in</strong>g Practices<br />
Number <strong>of</strong> complementary feeds per day<br />
Mode <strong>of</strong> feed<strong>in</strong>g complementary food<br />
Supervision <strong>of</strong> complementary feed<strong>in</strong>g by<br />
Percent<br />
n 208<br />
≤2 26.9<br />
3 66.4<br />
≥4 4.8<br />
Not yet started CF 1.9<br />
Mother with spoon 1.0<br />
Mother with hand 34.1<br />
Self with spoon 4.3<br />
Self by hand 58.7<br />
Not yet started CF 1.9<br />
Mother 78.4<br />
Father 0.5<br />
Elder Sibl<strong>in</strong>g 4.3<br />
Grand parents 13.9<br />
Others 1.0<br />
Not yet started CF 1.9<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 14<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
Care <strong>of</strong> the child and personal Hygiene<br />
Particulars<br />
Care <strong>of</strong> the child when mother goes out for work<br />
Age group (months)<br />
Table – 15<br />
Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> the Morbidity among 0- 59 months <strong>children</strong> dur<strong>in</strong>g previous<br />
fortnight by age groups<br />
Age Group<br />
(months)<br />
n Fever Diarrhoea ARI<br />
At least one<br />
morbidity<br />
0-5 42 42.9 31.0 42.9 59.5<br />
6-11 68 44.1 33.8 55.9 69.1<br />
12-23 114 48.2 20.2 47.4 59.6<br />
24-35 97 40.2 22.7 41.2 54.6<br />
36-47 96 31.3 4.2 36.5 45.8<br />
48-59 47 36.2 8.5 38.3 53.2<br />
Pooled 464 40.7 19.2 43.8 56.5<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table – 16<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> mothers <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
Care <strong>of</strong> the child dur<strong>in</strong>g Sickness<br />
Particulars<br />
Personnel generally consulted dur<strong>in</strong>g illness <strong>of</strong> the child<br />
Morbidity dur<strong>in</strong>g previous fortnight<br />
Age group (months)<br />
Table - 17<br />
Participation (%) <strong>in</strong> ICDS supplementation programme<br />
(6- 59 months <strong>children</strong>)<br />
Particulars<br />
Age group (months)<br />
6-35 36-59 6-59<br />
n 279 143 422<br />
Participat<strong>in</strong>g 93.2 96.5 94.3<br />
Regular 69.9 86.0 75.3<br />
Irregular 23.3 10.5 19.0<br />
Not participat<strong>in</strong>g 6.8 3.5 5.7<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table -18<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 12- 24 months <strong>children</strong> accord<strong>in</strong>g to Coverage for<br />
Immunization <strong>under</strong> UIP<br />
Immunization Particulars<br />
Percent<br />
n 114<br />
Received all vacc<strong>in</strong>es ( Fully Immunized) 90.3<br />
Partially immunized 7.9<br />
Not immunized 1.8<br />
Reasons for no / <strong>in</strong>complete immunization<br />
BCG 98.2<br />
DPT1 98.2<br />
DPT2 96.5<br />
DPT3 94.7<br />
OPV1 96.5<br />
OPV2 95.6<br />
OPV3 93.9<br />
Measles 91.2<br />
Unaware <strong>of</strong> need 0.9<br />
Time & place not known/ <strong>in</strong>convenient 3.5<br />
Source <strong>of</strong> <strong>in</strong>formation<br />
Not <strong>of</strong>fered 4.4<br />
Mother busy 0.9<br />
Fully immunized 90.3<br />
Mother & child protection card 22.8<br />
Immunization card 1.8<br />
Parents 73.7<br />
Not immunized 1.8<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table - 19<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 9- 59 months Children Accord<strong>in</strong>g to receipt <strong>of</strong> massive dose<br />
vitam<strong>in</strong> A dur<strong>in</strong>g previous one <strong>year</strong><br />
Age group (months)<br />
Particulars<br />
9-17 18-35 36-59 9-59<br />
Receipt <strong>of</strong> massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A<br />
No. <strong>of</strong> doses <strong>of</strong> vitam<strong>in</strong> A<br />
Place <strong>of</strong> adm<strong>in</strong>istration<br />
n 83 150 143 376<br />
Yes 84.0 82.0 88.8 85.0<br />
No 9.7 8.7 5.6 7.7<br />
Do not remember 6.3 9.3 5.6 7.2<br />
One 84.0 8.0 4.2 23.3<br />
Two NA 74.0 84.6 61.7<br />
Not received 9.7 8.7 5.6 7.7<br />
Do not remember 6.3 9.3 5.6 7.2<br />
Home 1.2 0.7 0.0 0.5<br />
AWC 80.8 79.3 86.0 82.2<br />
SC 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.3<br />
PHC 0.0 1.3 2.8 1.6<br />
Not received/do not remember 16.0 18.0 11.2 15.0<br />
Massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A adm<strong>in</strong>istered by<br />
AWW 49.3 52.0 65.7 56.6<br />
ANM 32.7 28.7 20.3 26.4<br />
LHV 1.9 1.3 2.8 2.0<br />
Not received/do not remember 16.0 18.0 11.2 15.0<br />
Reasons for not receiv<strong>in</strong>g/<strong>in</strong>complete massive dose vitam<strong>in</strong> A<br />
Unaware <strong>of</strong> need 2.4 5.3 1.4 3.2<br />
Not <strong>of</strong>fered 5.8 7.3 4.9 6.1<br />
Time or place not convenient 1.5 0.0 1.4 0.9<br />
Child was sick 0.0 0.7 0.0 0.3<br />
Mothers was busy 0.0 2.0 1.4 1.3<br />
Fear <strong>of</strong> side effects 0.0 0.0 0.7 0.3<br />
Others 2.6 1.3 0.0 1.1<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
Table - 20<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 12-59 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to receipt <strong>of</strong> Iron & Folic<br />
Acid Tablets<br />
Age group (months)<br />
Particulars<br />
12-35 36-59 12-59<br />
Received IFA tablets<br />
IFA tablets received from<br />
No. <strong>of</strong> IFA tablets received<br />
No. <strong>of</strong> IFA tablets consumed<br />
n 211 143 354<br />
Yes 23.2 28.7 25.4<br />
No 76.8 71.3 74.6<br />
ANM 2.8 5.6 4.0<br />
AWW 20.4 23.1 21.5<br />
Not received 76.8 71.3 74.6<br />
Table - 21<br />
Prevalence (%) <strong>of</strong> nutritional deficiency signs among 0 - 59 months <strong>children</strong><br />
Cl<strong>in</strong>ical signs<br />
Age groups (Months)<br />
0-11 12-35 36-59 0-59<br />
No <strong>of</strong> <strong>children</strong> exam<strong>in</strong>ed 110 211 143 446<br />
NAD 100.0 93.4 95.9 96.1<br />
Emaciation - 5.7 0.7 3.0<br />
Marasmus - 2.4 - 1.1<br />
Bitot spots - - 0.7 0.2<br />
Dental caries - 1.9 - 0.9<br />
Conjunctival xerosis - 1.9 0.7 1.1<br />
Angular stomatitis - 0.9 - 0.4<br />
Hair sparse - 1.9 0.7 1.1<br />
NAD: No Abnormality Detected<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong> <strong>of</strong>
n<br />
Table -22<br />
Mean Height and weight <strong>of</strong> 0-59 months Children by age group and gender<br />
BOYS<br />
GIRLS<br />
Age<br />
Height (cm) Weight (kg) n Height (cm) Weight (kg)<br />
(Months)<br />
Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD Mean ± SD<br />
3 50.9 0.78 3.2 0.66
Table - 23<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0-59 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to nutritional status by<br />
SD Classification: By Age group<br />
Underweight (Weight for Age)<br />
Age<br />
Group<br />
(months)<br />
n<br />
Severe<br />
(
Table -24<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children accord<strong>in</strong>g to nutritional status by<br />
SD Classification*: By Gender<br />
<strong>Nutritional</strong> <strong>Status</strong><br />
Gender<br />
n<br />
Table -25<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children by <strong>Nutritional</strong> status accord<strong>in</strong>g to SD<br />
Classification: By Socio-demographic variables<br />
Particulars<br />
1. Community<br />
n<br />
Weight for age Height for age Weight for height<br />
Table -25 (Contd...)<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children by <strong>Nutritional</strong> status accord<strong>in</strong>g to SD<br />
Classification: By Socio-demographic variables<br />
Particulars<br />
n<br />
Weight for age Height for age Weight for height<br />
Table – 25 (Contd…)<br />
Distribution (%) <strong>of</strong> 0- 59 months Children by <strong>Nutritional</strong> status accord<strong>in</strong>g to<br />
SD Classification: By Socio-demographic variables<br />
Weight for age Height for age Weight for height<br />
Particulars n