Influence of socioeconomic disparities on the nutritional status of Mongolian children under 5 years of age Ganzorig Dorjdagva, Ph.D. HRO Meeting May 28,

National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS) growth reference is being used for assessment of nutritional status of children since NCHS reference has several limitations and multi ethnical reference was required. In 2006 WHO released new standards for assessing the growth and development of children from birth to 5 years of age. WHO recommends the use of the WHO standards to assess the growth and development of children worldwide. New WHO Standards

Undernutrition is progressively declining in Asia since Stunting was reduced from 40% to 29%; underweight was from 31% to 26%; and wasting was from 21% to 13%. (UNICEF, 2008) Underlying causes of malnutrition have been suggested: o Poverty o Lack of access to foods o Conflicts o Climate change o Lack of safe drinking water o Diseases Global Child Nutrition Status

Mongolia Child Stunting Prevalence in the World

Problems include poverty, unemployment, migration, lack of food safety and security. Although underweight and wasting are reduced drastically, stunting is still in a high level. Exclusive breastfeeding up to 6 months is practiced by majority of women. The provision of complementary foods is not adhered to the WHO recommendation. Problems Related to Nutrition Status of Children in Mongolia

% 6 Stunting in Mongolia ( ) by NCHS ref

Who are vulnerable to child undernutrition in Mongolia? What types of socioeconomic factors are related to child undernutrition in Mongolia? Are there any changes in national nutrition status after the adoption of the WHO growth standards? QUESTIONS NEED TO BE ANSWERED

Influence of Socioeconomic Disparities on the Nutritional Status of Mongolian Children under 5 Years of AgeSTUDY M

1.To examine the disparities in nutrition by demographic and socioeconomic factors. 2.To evaluate changes of nutritional status in children under 5 years of age between 2000 and 2005.OBJECTIVES

Survey name, yearRegions Total Clusters Households per Cluster House holds Total children under 5 years old Multi-Indicators Clusters Survey 2, Multi-Indicators Clusters Survey 3, Multi-Indicators Clusters Survey 3, Datasets are available in UNICEF web site: Datasets METHODS R

IndicatorMeasureCut-off StuntingHeight-for-age< - 2SD UnderweightWeight-for-age< - 2SD WastingWeight-for-height< - 2SD OverweightBody mass for index-for-age> 2SD Nutrition Indicators and Definition

VariableLevel Child age<2 years old, ≥2 years old GenderMale, Female* Areas of residenceRural areas, Urban areas* Mother’s education Less education (≤ 8 years of formal education) High education* (> 8 years of formal education) Wealth index Quintiles (Poorest, Second, Middle, Fourth, Richest*) * Reference level Demographic and Socioeconomic Variables

 Calculation of z-scores using WHO growth standard.  Calculation of undernutrition prevalences by sociodemographic factors.  Chi-square test was used to compare the prevalence of undernutrition between 2000 and  Odds ratios of undernutrition by demographic and socioeconomic factors were estimated with 95% confidence Interval. Statistical Analysis

Indicator MICS2, 2000 MICS3, 2005 MICS3, 2010 P value Underweight11.6% 5.3%3.3<0.001 Severe underweight3.9% 1.6%0.9<0.001 Wasting7.1% 2.7%1.6<0.001 Severe wasting3.0% 1.1%0.7<0.001 Overweight14.7% 17.1%10.9<0.05 Obese4.6% 4.9%?0.65 Stunting29.9% 27.5% Severe stunting12.0% 9.9%4.7<0.05 RESULTS Malnutrition Prevalence in 2000, 2005 and 2010

MICS2, 2000MICS3, 2005 Stunting Underweight WastingStuntingUnderweightWasting Male / Female 1.17 ( ) 1.22 ( ) 1.07 ( ) 1.19 ( ) 1.00 ( ) 0.94 ( ) Rural / Urban 1.89 ( ) 1.77 ( ) 1.48 ( ) 1.28 ( ) 1.26 ( ) 1.06 ( ) Less Educ. /High Educ ( ) 1.65 ( ) 1.49 ( ) 1.72 ( ) 2.01 ( ) 1.64 ( ) Unadjusted odds ratios and 95% confidential intervals of stunting, underweight and wasting for selected sociodemographic factors in children under 5 years of age in 2000 and

MICS2, 2000MICS3, 2005 Stunting Underweight WastingStuntingUnderweightWasting Male / Female 1.18 (1.05 – 1.32) 1.22 (1.04 – 1.44) 1.08 (0.88 – 1.32) 1.19 (1.02 – 1.39) 0.99 (0.73 – 1.35) 0.94 (0.62 – 1.44) Rural / Urban 1.21 (1.03 – 1.41) 1.14 (0.90 – 1.43) 1.15 (0.87 – 1.53) 0.80 (0.65 – 1.00) 0.61 (0.39 – 0.95) 0.62 (0.32 – 1.20) Less Educ. /High Educ (1.16 – 1.49) 1.32 (1.11 – 1.57) 1.29 (1.04 – 1.60) 1.41 (1.80 – 1.68) 1.61 (1.13 – 2.30) 1.61 (0.96 – 2.71) Adjusted odds ratios* and 95% confidential intervals of stunting, underweight and wasting for selected sociodemographic factors in children under 5 years of age in 2000 and

 Reduction was observed in rural areas, in severe forms. o Implementation of nutrition program reached to the target directed to under 2 years old and countryside. o Mass migration from rural areas after o Other studies showed: Mongolian complementary foods are not adhered with recommendation. Frequency and amount are insufficient, but contained high calories and low nutrients (Lander R, 2008). o Micronutrients deficiency – Vit D def 41%, supplementation 15%, 74% of under 3 years old children had Zn deficiency in Mongolia (NNS3, 2004; Lander R, 2010) Finding 1 – Nutrition Status was Improved, but Stunting was Persistent DISCUSSION

 As for growth patterns, boys in general tend to be taller and heavier than girls. o Other studies showed: Boys are taller in Bangladesh but shorter in sub-Saharan Africa (Dancer D, 2010; Wamany H, 2007) o Male gender is more predisposed to affect to undernutrition, morbidity and death (Elsmén E, 2002; Health statistics Mongolia, 2005) o Sex differential was not shown in NCHS reference, but it was shown in WHO standard in Mongolian cases. Finding 2 – Boys were More Stunted than Girls

Other studies showed:  Children in rural areas in the developing world were almost twice as likely to be underweight as children in urban areas (Gleland JG, 1988).  The rural children were 2 times more affected to stunting and underweight than urban children in Mongolia (NNS3, 2004).  Compared with 2000, in 2005 the area of residence difference did not show any effects. It might be related to the successful implementation of nutrition programs in countryside, which mainly involved under 2 years old children in Mongolia since Also it might be related with internal migration after Finding 3 – Residence Difference in Nutrition

 Similar to other studies in sub-Saharan Africa and Bangladesh (Wamany H, 2004 ; Giashuddin M, 2005).  The Mongolian women’s literacy rate is high (97.8%), but child feeding and caring practice are not adhered with the recommendation. Only 1.6% of 6-11 month old children, 0.9% of months old children, and no month old children were fed according to the amount and frequency specified in the WHO recommendations. (NNS3, 2004; Lander R, 2008 and 2010).  The lack of economic capacity and child caring and feeding knowledge may reduce health potential of their children. Finding 4 – Mother’s Education Level Difference in Nutrition

The nutritional status in children under five years of age is often associated with measures of poverty.  Other studies showed: The children who lived in low income households had 2 times more stunting and 1.7 times more underweight than the children who lived in middle and high income households in Mongolia (NNS3, 2004).  The poorest sectors were at least three times as likely to be stunted as those in the richest (Larrea C & Freire W, 2002).  Most of poor households placed in rural and peri urban areas. Less educated mothers of this study tend to belong to poor households. Finding 5 – Wealth Index Difference in Nutrition

STUNTING HAZ< -2SD MDG, Goal 1, objective 2: 2015 онд 13.0%-д хүргэнэ

UNDERWEIGHT WAZ < -2SD MDG, Goal 1, objective 2: 2015 онд 2.0%-д хүргэнэ

WASTING WHZ < -2SD MDG, Goal 1, objective 2: 2015 онд 1.0%-д хүргэнэ