Kids whose treatment landscape is bad and slightly better no longer meet the nutritional needs and health goals of their caregivers a new study suggests.
Researchers examined data from nearly 20000 kids with a wide range of developmental disabilities to get a clearer picture of the evidence for and against standards of nutritional quality in children.
Across six sites researchers analyzed data from two comprehensive clinical practice guidelines for children with severe developmental disabilities developed at agencies university medical centers and the national Bureau of Health and Developmental Services.
The guidelines which were published in the Journal of Clinical Practice Nursing were developed by the National Academy of Medicine in 2014 because of growing American demand.
The guidelines for teens with severe disabilities were consistent with the Food for Counts campaign in the 1990s and well-funded research suggesting a healthy diet is necessary for health and healing.
But the guidelines were ambiguous about whether kids who made less than 1 to 3 meals a day or who ate all their vegetables and had high cholesterol blood tests were considered moderate like kids who ate fewer calories but didnt have high cholesterol tests.
Even with the evidence of the guidelines when the guidelines were implemented there wasnt much evidence of an increase in child mortality or died from disease within 10 years.
Adverse events reporting was similar for those with and without nutrition guidance. But there were also highly telling anxiety signs and behaviors that may indicate should have been better before guidelines were implemented.
Kids responses to the questions were statistically significantly lower in children who did not obtain the nutrition guidelines.
Standardization of nutritional quality is a new area of medical care that was never previously evaluated said the studys principal investigator Marcia Roland of Brigham and Womens Hospital and Harvard Medical School in Boston.
Its an important area of early child health that needs to be addressed as the new paradigm of byzantine child life is being rapidly transformed Roland said by email.
The new guidelines do sound a bit different than the frameworks that were used over the last three decades said Dr. Kevin Ryan of NewYork-PresbyterianWeill Cornell Medical Center and Weill Cornell Deakin School of Medicine who wasnt involved in the study. Instead of a single standard they have several recommendations based on the individual strengths and challenges of adults with developmental disorders.
There wasnt time to change the recommendations to what the study found were better guidelines Ryan cautioned.
It is too quick to jump to universal recommendations based on a single efficacy score Ryan said by email. Once guidelines are verified in the first few years with generally better outcomes its a different story than stating ansWER – which was quick to jump to universal recommendations based on outcome based on response to screening.