Evidence Hub

Prevalence and significance of anaemia in childhood bacterial meningitis: a secondary analysis of prospectively collected data from clinical trials in Finland, Latin America and Angola

Pelkonen T, Roine I, Kallio M, Jahnukainen K, Peltola H

BMJ open, 2022

1,085 participants · 5 citations

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence and severity of anaemia and to examine its associations with outcome in children with bacterial meningitis (BM).

DESIGN: Secondary analysis of descriptive data from five randomised BM treatment trials.

SETTING: Hospitals in Finland, Latin America and Angola.

PARTICIPANTS: Consecutive children from 2 months to 15 years of age admitted with BM and who had haemoglobin (Hb) measured on admission.

OUTCOME MEASURES: Prevalence and degree of anaemia using the WHO criteria, and their associations with recovery with sequelae or death.

RESULTS: The median Hb was 11.8 g/dL in Finland (N=341), 9.2 g/dL in Latin America (N=597) and 7.6 g/dL in Angola (N=1085). Of the children, 79% had anaemia, which was severe in 29%, moderate in 58% and mild in 13% of cases. Besides study area, having anaemia was independently associated with age 3 days, weight-for-age z-score <-3 and other than meningococcal aetiology. Irrespective of the study area, anaemia correlated with the markers of disease severity. In children with severe to moderate anaemia (vs mild or no anaemia), the risk ratio for death was 3.38 and for death or severe sequelae was 3.07.

CONCLUSION: Anaemia, mostly moderate, was common in children with BM, especially in Angola, in underweight children, among those with treatment delay, and in pneumococcal meningitis. Poor outcome was associated with anaemia in all three continents.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The registration numbers of Angolan trials…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a secondary / pooled analysis, done in people. Its evidence level is 3 of 5 (Moderate · trial / cohort / secondary analysis). Trials without a large randomized design, cohorts and secondary analyses give moderate evidence. Reported size: 1,085 participants or records.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free