Download General Nutrition Survey 2009 - 2010

MINISTRY OF HEALTH
NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF NUTRITION
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY
2009 - 2010
HA NOI - 2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY
2009-2010
Editors in chief:
Le Thi Hop, Le Danh Tuyen
Contributors:
Le Thi Hop, Le Danh Tuyen,
Le Bach Mai, Nguyen Thi Lam, Nguyen Hong Truong, Tran Thanh Đo,
Phan Van Huan, Truong Hong Son, Nguyen Chi Tam,
Nguyen Xuan Ninh, Lê Hong Dung, Nguyen Lan, Nguyen Viet Luan,
Nguyen Duy Son, Do Phuong Ha
Nguyen Cong Khan, M. Dibley, Nguyen Phong, Nguyen Dinh Chung
Roger Mathisen, Do Hong Phuong
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
FOREWORD
The first General Nutrition Survey was conducted between 1981-1985. Further surveys
were carried out in 1987-1989 and in 2000. This fourth, and most recent General Survey, was
conducted in 2009-2010.
In addition to the aforementioned general surveys, additional data have been collected
in the following surveys: Epidemiological survey of vitamin A deficiency and exophthalmia
(1985), Survey on maternal and child nutritional status and exophthalmia (1994), National
survey of nutritional anemia (1995 and 2000), Assessing the PEM project (2004), and the
General survey of overweight and obesity in adults (2005).
The 4th General Survey was conducted to evaluate the 2001-2010 National Nutrition
Strategy goals, as well as to provide scientific evidence of trends in food consumption and
nutrition status for the National Nutrition Strategy for 2011-2020, with a vision toward 2030.
In addition, data from the General Survey are also useful for nutrition research in national
institutions and universities.
The National Institute of Nutrition worked closely in collaboration with the Ministry of
Health, Department of Science and Training, Department of Preventive Medicine, Department
of Maternal and Child Health, and Vietnam Food Administration to successfully conduct the
survey.
We also gratefully acknowledge technical guidance from General Statistic Office and
UNICEF Hanoi.
Special thanks are also due to the Department of Health and Preventive Medicine Centers
in all provinces and cities, as well as local health care workers and households for their active
participation.
We are delighted to present the findings of the comprehensive report on the General
Nutrition Survey for 2009-2010.
On behalf of
The General Nutrition Survey’s Steering Committee
Dr. Le Danh Tuyen
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
FOREWORD
PART A. BACKGROUND...................................................................................................................................1
PART B. STUDY OBJECTIVES.........................................................................................................................5
I.
GENERAL OBJECTIVE.......................................................................................................................7
II. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES .....................................................................................................................7
1. Potential risks................................................................................................................................8
2. Benefits of the general survey ................................................................................................8
PART C. SURVEY METHODOLOGY...........................................................................................................11
PART D. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS .................................................................................................19
I.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF THE SURVEY SAMPLE...............................................23
II. NUTRITIONAL STATUS..................................................................................................................23
1. Nutritional status of children under 5 years.................................................................23
1.1. Underweight.......................................................................................................................24
1.1.1. Underweight by age and sex ............................................................................... 24
1.1.2. Underweight by ecological zone.........................................................................25
1.1.3. Underweight by household wealth....................................................................26
1.1.4. Underweight by urban/rural households.........................................................27
1.1.5. Underweight by ethnicity......................................................................................28
1.1.6. Additional factors and underweight..................................................................28
1.1.7. Map of prevalence of underweight by province .............................................29
1.1.8. Weight-for-age Z-score curves.............................................................................31
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.2. Stunting................................................................................................................................31
1.2.1. Stunting by age and sex .......................................................................................32
1.2.2. Stunting by ecological zone .................................................................................32
1.2.3. Stunting by household wealth.............................................................................33
1.2.4. Stunting by urban/rural households..................................................................34
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.2.5. Stunting by ethnicity ..............................................................................................35
1.2.6. Additional factors and stunting ..........................................................................35
1.2.7. Map of prevalence of stunting by province......................................................36
1.2.8. Height-for-age Z-score curves .............................................................................38
1.3. Wasting .................................................................................................................................38
1.3.1. Wasting by age and sex .........................................................................................38
1.3.2. Wasting by ecological zone ..................................................................................39
1.3.3. Wasting by household wealth .............................................................................40
1.3.4. Wasting by urban/rural households ..................................................................41
1.3.5. Wasting by ethnicity ...............................................................................................41
1.3.6. Additional factors and wasting...........................................................................42
1.3.7. Map of prevalence of wasting by province.......................................................43
1.3.8. Weight-for-Height Z-score curves.......................................................................44
1.4. Combined wasting and stunting ................................................................................44
1.4.1. Stunting and wasting by sex ................................................................................45
2. Trends of undernutrition in children under 5 years...................................................46
2.1. Trends at the national level from 2000-2010 ..........................................................46
2.2. Trends of undernutrition by ecological zone..........................................................47
2.3. Overnutrition in children under 5...............................................................................50
2.4. Conclusions.........................................................................................................................50
3. Nutritional status of children 5-19 years old ...............................................................52
3.1. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition
in children 5-10 years old...............................................................................................52
3.2. Overweight and obesity in children 5-19 years old ............................................ 53
3.2.2. Overweight and obesity by ethnicity .................................................................54
3.2.3. Overweight and obesity by household wealth ...............................................55
3.2.4. Overweight and obesity by ecological zone ....................................................55
TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.2.1. Overweight and obesity by age and sex ...........................................................53
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
3.2.5. Overweight and obesity by urban/rural ...........................................................56
3.2.6. Additional factors and overweight/obesity .....................................................57
3.3. Conclusion.......................................................................................................................... 57
4. Nutritional status of adults over 19 years old .............................................................57
4.1. Overall nutritional status of adults over 19 years old ..........................................57
4.1.1. Chronic energy deficiency (CED) .........................................................................57
4.1.2. Overweight and obesity ........................................................................................59
5. Height growth in Viet Namese people ............................................................................61
5.1. Height growth in children under five years.............................................................61
5.2. Trends of anthropometry among children 6-14 years.........................................64
5.2.1. Trend of mean height .............................................................................................64
5.2.2. Trend of mean weight ............................................................................................65
5.3. Height in adults .................................................................................................................66
III. NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF MOTHERS WITH CHILDREN UNDER 5 YEARS ..............68
IV. MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND BREASTFEEDING PRACTICES......................70
1. Micronutrient deficiencies ...................................................................................................70
1.1. Anaemia and vitamin A deficiency by ecological region ...................................70
1.2. Prevalence of anaemia and vitamin A deficiency by age group......................71
2. Situation of breastfeeding...................................................................................................72
3. Prevalence of coverage of high dose vitamin A capsule supplementation
in children and lactating women after delivery .........................................................73
V. FOOD CONSUMPTION ..................................................................................................................73
1. Overall findings ........................................................................................................................74
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.1. Household food consumption in 2009-2010..........................................................74
1.2. Comparison of the food intake in the Vietnam 2009 General Nutrition
Survey with the Recommendations of the National Institute
of Nutrition 2001-2010....................................................................................................76
1.3. Nutritive values in the dietary intake.........................................................................77
1.4. Trends in food consumption.........................................................................................78
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.4.1. Total daily food consumption..............................................................................78
1.4.2. Trend in food consumption ..................................................................................79
1.4.3. Changes in protein and fat intake ......................................................................80
2. Dietary energy intake and energy proportion............................................................81
2.1. Dietary energy proportion by ecological region...................................................82
2.2. Changes in the contribution of energy, protein,
and fat from food intake.................................................................................................83
2.2.1. Composition of dietary energy sources.............................................................84
2.2.2. Composition of dietary protein sources ............................................................85
2.2.3. Composition of dietary fat sources.....................................................................86
VI. FOOD CONSUMPTION IN CHILDREN FROM 2-5 YEARS.................................................87
1. Main findings on the dietary intake in children 2-5 years old ..................................87
2. The nutritive value of dietary intake..................................................................................87
VII. KAP REPORT ON HOUSEHOLD FOOD SAFETY ..................................................................91
1. Percentage of people who have seen/heard/learnt about food safety ................91
2. Sources of information on food hygiene and safety....................................................92
3. Causes of food poisoning ......................................................................................................93
4. Knowledge of people on how to prevent food poisoning ........................................94
5. Proportion of people who consumed raw or rare meat or fish................................95
6. Proportion of people who consumed salad or blood pudding...............................95
7. Proportion of people who consumed raw egg or uncooked egg ..........................96
8. Use of separate cutting boards and knives for raw and cooked food ...................96
9. Length of time between cooking and eating foods ....................................................96
10. Keeping leftover food for the next meal ..........................................................................97
12. Practice of washing cooking and eating utensils..........................................................98
13. Practice of washing hands before eating or after using toilet..................................99
14. Knowledge of food poisoning signs ..................................................................................99
TABLE OF CONTENTS
11. Practice of washing vegetables and fruits before cooking or eating.....................98
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
15. Food poisoning episodes reported in the last month per household................100
16. Household food poisoning cases reported to the health/local authority.........101
17. Health/local authority response following information about
food poisoning ........................................................................................................................101
18. Collection of samples for testing when food poisoning occurs............................102
19. Response of families when food poisoning occurs ...................................................102
PART E. CONCLUSION.................................................................................................................................103
PART F. RECOMMENDATIONS.................................................................................................................107
PART G. APPENDIX.......................................................................................................................................111
TABLE OF CONTENTS
REFERENCES ...................................................................................................................................................249
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.1. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition in children
under 5 years by sex – 2010.....................................................................................................23
Table 4.2. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition in children
5-19 years of age by sex ............................................................................................................52
Table 4.3. Mean height in children 1-5 years by age and gender..................................................61
Table 4.4. The mean height of children (1-5 years) ..............................................................................63
Table 4.5. Trends of linear growth from 1975 to 2009........................................................................65
Table 4.6. Mean height of adults >=20 years by sex and age group ............................................67
Table 4.7. Mean height of adults by nationality ...................................................................................68
Table 4.8. Prevalence of anemia and vitamin A deficiency in children
by ecological region ...................................................................................................................70
Table 4.9. Child feeding practices..............................................................................................................72
Table 4.10. Prevalence of coverage of vitamin A supplements......................................................73
Table 4.11. Changes in food consumption in the General Nutrition Surveys ...........................79
Table 4.12. Changes in food consumption in the General Nutrition Surveys ...........................81
Table 4.13. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met in children
24-59 months by age group..................................................................................................89
Table 4.14. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met in children
24-59 months by nutrient and age group........................................................................90
Table 4.15. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met in children
24-59 months by the classification of undernutrition .................................................91
Table 4.16. Percentage of people who have seen/heard/learnt about food safety................92
Table 4.17. Main sources of information on food hygiene and safety .........................................92
Table 4.18. Causes of food poisoning ......................................................................................................93
Table 4.19. Knowledge of people on how to prevent food poisoning........................................94
Table 4.21. The proportion of people who consumed raw salad or blood pudding..............95
Table 4.22. The proportion of people who consumed raw egg or uncooked egg..................96
Table 4.23. Use of separate cutting boards and knives for raw and cooked foods .................96
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.20. The proportion of people who consumed raw or rare meat or fish.......................95
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.24. Length of time between cooking and eating foods ....................................................97
Table 4.25. Keeping leftover food for the next meal ..........................................................................97
Table 4.26. Practice of washing vegetables and fruits before cooking or eating ....................98
Table 4.27. Practice of washing cooking and eating utensils..........................................................98
Table 4.28. Practice of washing hands before eating or after using the toilet..........................99
Table 4.29. Knowledge of food poisoning signs ...............................................................................100
Table 4.30. Food poisoning episodes in the last month by household ....................................100
Table 4.31. Household food poisoning cases reported to the health/local authority.........101
Table 4.32. Health/local authority response following information
about food poisoning ...........................................................................................................101
Table 4.33. Collection of samples for testing when food poisoning occurs............................102
LIST OF TABLES
Table 4.34. Response of families when food poisoning occurs ...................................................102
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.1. Distribution of surveyed subjects by ethnic group ......................................................23
Figure 4.2. Prevalence of underweight by age and sex, Viet Nam 2010 .....................................25
Figure 4.3. Prevalence of underweight by ecological zone in Viet Nam, 2010 .........................26
Figure 4.4. Prevalence of underweight by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010.........................26
Figure 4.5. Prevalence of underweight by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010 ......................27
Figure 4.6. Prevalence of underweight by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010.........................28
Figure 4.7. Map of the prevalence of underweight by province, Vietnam 2010 ......................30
Figure 4.8. Weight-for-age Z-score distribution by sex, Viet Nam 2010 ......................................31
Figure 4.9. Prevalence of stunting by age and sex, Viet Nam 2010...............................................32
Figure 4.10. Prevalence of stunting by ecological zone, Viet Nam 2010.....................................33
Figure 4.11. Prevalence of stunting by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010 ...............................34
Figure 4.12. Prevalence of stunting by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010.............................34
Figure 4.13. Prevalence of stunting by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010 ...............................35
Figure 4.14. Map of the prevalence of stunting by province, Viet Nam 2010 ...........................37
Figure 4.15. Height-for-age Z score distributions by sex, Viet Nam 2010...................................38
Figure 4.16. Prevalence of wasting by age and sex groups, Viet Nam 2010..............................39
Figure 4.17. Prevalence of wasting by ecological zone in Viet Nam, 2010.................................39
Figure 4.18. Prevalence of wasting by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010.................................40
Figure 4.19. Prevalence of wasting by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010..............................41
Figure 4.20. Prevalence of wasting by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010 ................................42
Figure 4.21. Map of the prevalence of wasting by province, Viet Nam 2010 ............................43
Figure 4.22. Weight-for-height Z score distributions by sex, Viet Nam 2010 ............................44
Figure 4.23. Prevalence of wasting and stunting by age, Viet Nam 2010...................................45
Figure 4.25. Prevalence of undernutriton in children under 5 from 2000-2010 ......................46
Figure 4.26. Prevalence of underweight in children under 5 by ecological zone ...................47
Figure 4.27. Prevalence of underweight in children under 5 by ecological zone ...................47
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.24. Prevalence of wasting and stunting by sex, Viet Nam 2010 ...................................45
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.28. Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 by ecological zone ............................48
Figure 4.29. Prevalence of stunting in children under 5 by ecological zone ............................48
Figure 4.30. Prevalence of wasting in chidren under 5 by ecological zone ..............................49
Figure 4.31. Prevalence of wasting in chidren under 5 by ecological zone ..............................49
Figure 4.32. Prevalence of overnutrition in children under 5 ........................................................50
Figure 4.33. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old
by age and sex.........................................................................................................................54
Figure 4.34. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old 55
by maternal ethnicity............................................................................................................54
Figure 4.35. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old
by household wealth ............................................................................................................55
Figure 4.36. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old
by ecological zone .................................................................................................................56
Figure 4.37. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by region .................56
Figure 4.38. Prevalence of overweight in children from5-19 years old
by age and region ..................................................................................................................57
Figure 4.39. Prevalence of CED in adults over 19 years old in 2000 and 2010 .........................58
Figure 4.40. Prevalence of CED in males in 2000 and 2010.............................................................58
Figure 4.41. Prevalence of CED in females in 2000 and 2010 .........................................................59
Figure 4.42. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in general
from 2000 and 2010 surveys ..............................................................................................59
Figure 4.43. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in males
from 2000 and 2010 surveys ..............................................................................................60
Figure 4.44. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in females
from 2000 and 2010 surveys ..............................................................................................60
Figure 4.45. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in females by region .................................61
Figure 4.46. Trends of mean height in boys and girls between 1985-2010 in GNS...............62
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 4.47. Mean height of boys and girls by nationality...............................................................64
Figure 4.48. Prevalence of CED among mothers with children under 5 years old
between 2000 and 2010 ......................................................................................................69
Figure 4.49. Prevalence of overweight and obesity among mothers with children
under 5 years of age between 2000 and 2010 .............................................................69
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.50. Prevalence of vitamin A deficiency and anaemia in children
under 5 by age group in 2008 ...........................................................................................71
Figure 4.51. Mean food consumption in the Vietnam General Nutrition Surveys, NIN.........78
Figure 4.52. Changes in the ratio of animal food to total food intake.........................................79
Figure 4.53. Trends in food consumption ..............................................................................................79
Figure 4.54. Changes in protein and fat intake in the diet...............................................................80
Figure 4.55. Proportion of energy from protein, fat and carbohydrate in the Vietnam
2009 General Nutrition survey ..........................................................................................81
Figure 4.56. Proportion of energy by ecological region ...................................................................82
Figure 4.57. Energy intake by ecological region..................................................................................83
Figure 4.58. Per cent contribution of foods to total energy in the diet in 1990 .......................84
Figure 4.59. Per cent contribution of foods to total energy in the diet in 2000 .......................84
Figure 4.60. Per cent contribution of foods to total energy in the diet in 2009-2010............84
Figure 4.61. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total protein
in the diet in 1990 ..................................................................................................................85
Figure 4.62. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total protein
in the diet in 2000 ..................................................................................................................85
Figure 4.63. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total protein
in the diet in 2010 ..................................................................................................................85
Figure 4.64. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total fat
in the diet in1990 ...................................................................................................................86
Figure 4.65. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total fat
in the diet in 2000 ..................................................................................................................86
Figure 4.66. Per cent contribution of food intake in the total fat
in the diet in 2010 ..................................................................................................................86
Figure 4.67. Composition of dietary energy intake by ecological region...................................88
Figure 4.68. Average rice consumption by child’s nutritional status (gr/child/day)................88
Figure 4.69. Average rice consumption by age group (gr/child/day)...........................................89
LIST OF FIGURES
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
TABLE OF CONTENTS
ABBREVIATIONS
BMI
Body Mass Index
CED
Chronic Energy Deficiency
CI
Confidence interval
FAO
Food and Agriculture Organization
HAZ
Height for age z-score
HB
Hemoglobin
KAP
Knowledge, Attitude and Practice
NNS
National Nutrition Strategy
NIN
National Institute of Nutrition
RDA
Recommended Dietary Allowance
UNICEF
The United Nations Children's Fund
USDA
United States Department of Agriculture
WAZ
Weight for age z-score
WHZ
Weight for height z-score
WHO
World Health Organization
PART
A
BACKGROUND
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The panorama of nutrition situation in the world today is complex with different bright
and dark patches. Some African countries in 2008- 2009 still suffered food crisis, such as
Ethiopia, Dijbouti, Kenya, Somalia etc. In Dijbouti in 2008, there was 80 thousands people in
urban areas having serious poverty and hunger [26,31]. Malnutrition, vitamin A deficiency
and anemia rate is very high. As a consequence, the influences of malnutrition is quite
serious.
In Asia, there are still many challenges and difficulties threatening health and nutrition
status by people in a number of countries. Bangladesh, for example, had the prevalence of
under-5 child malnutrition of 47.5% in 2008. In the meantime, many countries, including
Vietnam, have achieved good progress in the reduction of child malnutrition.
Many countries have been entering the transition period with changes in economy
leading to changes in population pattern, morbidity pattern, as well as diet pattern. Besides
countries with industrialization and rapid development such as China and Thailand, this
transition also receives new members, which have just been through the developing period.
Health and nutrition pattern has been changed with the co-existence of the double
burden – undernutrition and overnutrition, and in fact it is improper nutrition.
Undernutrition in children is still an important challenge for public health and development in Vietnam. Malnutrition prevalence has been reduced significantly since the last
decade with remarkable reduction rate. However, stunting prevalence is still at high level and
varies greatly among ecological regions. In 2008, the prevalence of child underweight was
19.9% but that of stunting was 32.6%.
Fetal malnutrition and early malnutrition are still prevalent in Vietnam, particularly in the
poor and disadvantaged areas. This problem is associated with increased risk of obesity and
non-communicable diseases in later life [30].
At the same time, growth velocity in Vietnam that has been observed in early 1990s is
now more prominent in both children and adults [16]. This trend reflects a more favorable
living environment, including that of nutrition, especially in the first 2 years of life [27]. It
indicates that the reduction of stunting and child growth acceleration have both short term
and long term benefits.
Vietnam has been entering transition period and issues in nutrition transition have been
given attention by many researchers, socio-economic experts and policy makers. There has
been co-existence of undernutrition and food insecurity as well as emerging problems such
as overweight/obesity and non-communicable diseases.
3
PART A
Assessment of nutrition situation, food consumption and related factors are given
attention by most of the countries over the world. Progress or remaining problems of health
and nutrition indicated by health and nutrition indicators that are recommended by WHO,
UNICEF and FAO should be closely monitored to timely propose early interventions with an
effective prevention strategy [8,10].
PART A
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The roles of micronutrients has been emphasized more in this period of nutrition transition [14,21]. This is because the improvement of protein, fat and energy intake does not
always accompany the adequacy of micronutrient intake. On the other hand, the increased
consumption of processed foods leads to unavoidable lost of natural micronutrients in the
preparing process. Moreover, when the macronutrients increase, there is likely a relative
insufficiency of protective and anti-oxidant substances in the diet. This is a key point for
research in diet and nutrition in transition.
Overweight/obesity has became a public health issue in Vietnam recently. It was not a
problem for Vietnam before 1995. Studies in large cities show the increase of this problem
year after year [6,9,16]. Even more, under-5 child overweight has been observed more clearly
in annual surveillance data.
Therefore, before entering a new decade, it is necessary to conduct a general nutrition
survey, aiming at assessing the nutrition status of the Vietnamese population today and
related risk factors and generate evidences to develop the new NNS for upcoming period
2011-2020.
4
PART
B
STUDY OBJECTIVES
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
I.
GENERAL OBJECTIVE:
To assess nutrition status, household food consumption and related factors of Vietnamese
target population, especially under-5 children.
Indicators related to nutritional status of children and mothers based on sample population in ecological regions and nationwide:
1) To describe nutritional status of children under 5.
2) To describe the nutritional status of mothers of under-5 children.
3) To describe the situation of feeding practice for the youngest under-5 children,
especially the indicators about breastfeeding and complementary food.
4) To describe and analyse effectiveness of Vitamin A program and Vitamin A coverage
rate among target groups
Other objectives which are related to NNS 2001-2010 for sample population in ecological
regions and nationwide:
1) To describe nutritional status (including overweight and obesity prevalence) among
the Vietnamese population by age-groups and sex.
2) To describe the household’s food consumption for the last 24 hours.
3) To describe the food consumption and preparation for under-5 children for the last
24 hours.
4) To describe the awareness and practices of food hygiene and safety at household
level.
5) To estimate the consumption of iodised salt at household level and investigate the
reasons for not using it.
6) To describe activities of NNS at province and commune levels
The study will not only determine the results of NNS 2001-2010, but also anticipate and
establish objectives for NNS 2011 – 2020.
It is important to expand the sample for nutrition indicators for provincial level (instead
of ecological regions in the past) to establish provincial nutrition strategies.
International organizations or NGOs which are interested in the nutrition field in Vietnam
can also use the study results for their planing, implementation and monitoring and evaluation of collecting activities for communities.
7
PART B
II. SPECIFIC OBJECTIVES:
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The provincial authorities’ capacity will be improved through technical training for the
survey, including analysis and interpretation for local corrective actions.
PART B
The provinces will be equipped with anthropometric measurement equipment and
food scales.
1. Potential risks:
There is high risk of bad weather or natural calamity when carrying out the survey in
provinces which are located by the coast, center and south of Vietnam. The schedule for
those provinces can be flexible.
The anthropometric measurement may also cause a given injury to the children. In order
to reduce the risk, the investigators should be trained carefully and provided with clear
instructions, the survey should also be supervised accordingly.
In order to prevent spreading a infection disease during data colecting at the field, any
investigator, supervisor or team leader who are sick will not be seclected. If there is an
epidemic in the selected cluster, another cluster will be sampled.
2. Benefits of the General Survey:
Beside determining the results of NNS 2001-2010, anticipate and establish objectives for
NNS 2011 – 2020, the study will bring other benefits as below:
•
Data collected every 10 years of census-related anthropometric indicators and food
consumption in Vietnam are the milestones when evaluating the changes in the
biology indexes among the Vietnamese population and related factors.
•
This is the first national survey for hygiene and food safety and will contribute to
increased understanding of this sector in the community.
•
Results from the diets of children under age 5 in this nation survey with the most
updated methods of WHO in 2009 has special meaning for programs to combat
malnutrition in the country. These data may be not allow to determine the energy
and nutrient position of diets of children under five, but is also a source of accurate
information compared to other methods previously applied in determining the
extent of child reasonableness of the mothers Vietnam today.
The survey aims to evaluate the objectives which might be achieved:
1) NNS 2001-2010 aims to ensure the following objectives:
a. The prevalence of underweight among children under five to be reduced to under
20% by 2010.
b. The prevalence of stunting among children under 5 to be decreased by 1,5% per year.
8
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
c.
The prevalence of exclusive breast-feeding in first 4 months to increase to 60%
by 2010.
d. The low birth weight rate (under 2500gram) to be reduced to 6% by 2010.
The prevalence of chronic energy deficiency in reproductive-age women to be
reduced by 1% per year.
f.
The prevalence of overweight in children under-5 to be remained under 5%.
2) The percentage of household’s energy intake may not be higher than the result of
National Survey 2000.
3) The universal salt Iodization target is maintained above 90% nationwide.
9
PART B
e.
PART
C
SURVEY METHODOLOGY
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
I.
STUDY DESIGN
A cross-sectional study, describing and analysing the correlation between variables.
II. SURVEY SITES
The survey will be conducted at randomized selected communes among 64 provinces
(according to administrative border of Vietnam in 2008).
PART C
III. SURVEY SUBJECTS
Under-5 children and mothers, households and household members
1. Sampling design
Sample size calculation:
The sample size is calculated following the formula of MICS (Multiple Indicator Cluster
Survey) by UNICEF.
Formula for sample size (number of subjects)
n = [4(r)(1-r)(deff)(1.1)]/[(e2)(p)]
Formula for required number of households
nh = (n)/(ph) = [4(r)(1-r)(deff)(1.1)]/[(e2)(p)(ph)]
In which:
r
= estimated prevalance
e
= margin of error
n
= required target sample
nh
= required number of households
deff
= design effect
p
= proportion of households which has sampled subjects
ph
= average household size
1,1
= coefficient for 10% of subjects who don’t answer
Sample size calculation for generalization to national and regional level
Assumptions
Design efect (deff)
2
13
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
4
Proportion of households of under-2 children (p)
0,19
Proportion of households of under-5 children (p)
0,28
Proportion of under-2 children having diarrhoea last week (p)
0,12
Proportion of under-5 children having diarrhoea last week (p)
0,07
Proportion of under-2 children being breasfed (p)
0,9
PART C
Average household size (ph)
No
Indicators
Subject
Estimated
prevalence
(r)
Marginal
errors
Sample
size
(number
of subjects)
Sample
size
(number
of households)
(e)
(n)
(nh)
Reduced malnutrition prevalence among mothers and children
1
Not given breasfeeding
0-23 months old
in first hour
0.42
0.05
780
1140
2
Not given exclusive
breasfeeding in first 4
months
0-23 months old
0.82
0.05
472
691
3
Not use ORS(1) while
diahrea
diahrea. under-2
0.68
0.05
696
7635
4
Not use ORS(2) while
diahrea
Diahrea. under-5
<5 old
0.806
0.05
500
6382
5
Underweight
Under-5 children
0.18
0.05
472
422
6
Stunting
Under-5 children
0.3
0.05
672
600
7
Low birthweight
children
Under-5 children
0.35
0.05
728
650
Reduced proportion of household with low energy in take (below 1800 Kcal)
8
Household with low
energy intake
household
0.15
0.05
408
408
Other indicators
9
Households not using
Iodized salt
household
0.1
0.05
288
288
10
Household not
accessing safe water
sources
household
0.14
0.05
327
327
14
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The final estimation of sample-size of 7680 households will satisfy for the main selected
indicators. The sample size of 480 households (for the Northen mountainous and Central highland regions) is still big enough to estimate the main indicators for the key indicators (Food
intake consumption, iodised salt use and safe water assess).
Sample size for provincial level:
Assumptions
2
Proportion of households with under-2 children (p)
0,19
Proportion of households with under-5 children (p)
0,28
Proportion of under-2 children being breasfed (p)
0,9
TT
Indicators
Subject
PART C
Design effect (deff)
Estimated
prevalence
Marginal
errors
Sample size
(r)
(e)
(n)
Reduce the malnutrition prevalence among children and mothers
2
Not given exclusive
breasfeeding in first 4 months
0-23
months old
0.18
0.05
472
5
Underweight
Children
under-5
0.18
0.05
472
6
Stunting
Children
under-5
0.3
0.05
672
7
Low birth weight
Children
under-5
0.35
0.05
728
The final estimation of sample-size of 728 children will satisfy the main selected indicators
at province level. The sample size is double to estimate by gender. The final sample size is
1530 children under 5 years for each province.
2. Sampling procedure
There are two stages of sampling:
2.1.The survey on nutritional status of under-5 children and their mothers: selection is
based on representative sampling for provinces, ecological regions and the country.
a) Subjects:
i)
Sample size: 97920 under-5 children and their mothers.
15
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
ii) Criteria of selection: a) The mother of under-5 children is healthy, not sick, staying
at household at the survey periode and agree to participate in the survey; b) the child
is under 5 years old at the survey periode and not sick (in need for intensive care of
health worker such as high fever or injured).
PART C
iii) Criteria of exception: a) The mother refuses to participate; b) the mother is sick; c)
the mother is not be able to understand the interview questions; d) the mother is not
able to answer the interview questions; e) the mother refuses the anthropometric
measurement.
b. Sampling procedure:
Nationwide
97920 children
Child 1
Province 1
1530 children
Province 2
Commune 1
51children
Commune 2
... Commune
30
Village 1
17 children
Village 2
Village 3
Child 2
...Child 17
... Province
64
Diagram 1: Sampling procedure for 30 clusters survey.
The survey sample will represent population of former 64 provinces as of 2008. In the
first stage, 30 clusters are randomly sampled in each province and considered primary sampling units (PSU) with probability proportionate to the size (PPS). There will be 64 x 30=1920
clusters in total. In each PSU, 3 villages will be randomly selected and considered secondary
sampling unit (SSU). Seventeen children are sampled with their mothers within each of
the selected villages by method from door to door. The total number of children will be 64 x
30 x 3 x 17=97920 (Diagram 1). If the child is absent while the mother is at home, the interview
will still be conducted except for the child’s anthropometric measurement. If there is no
mother while the major child care giver and the child are home, the interview and child’s anthropometric measurement will be carried out. If both the mother and major child care giver
are not home, the child will be measured without interview. If both the mother and her child
16
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
are absent, the family next door will be selected. Every mentioned situations will be recorded
and considered while the data analysing.
The implementation order:
2.2.Dietary intake of household survey: the sample is selected representative at ecological
region and nationwide
a) Subjects:
i)
Number: 7680 households and its members
ii) Criteria of selection: a) There are at least 3 members in the household; b) The household agrees to participate in the survey; c) There is at least one adult at home and
able to understand and answer the questions.
iii) Criteria of exception: a) The household refuses to answer; b) There is no adult at
home who able to understand and answer the questions; c) the household is
non-cooperative; d) Cannot find the selected household; e) There is a infection disease
in the household that can be spread out
b) Sampling procedure:
The sample stage will represent for 8 ecological. Among the 30 clusters of PSU, 8 clusters
will be randomly selected so the total will be 64 8=512 clusters. In each PSU, SSU will still be
3 villages which are the same as from 30 clusters sample stage. In each village, 5 households
will be sampled from the household list using the systematic randomized method. The total
will be 64 x 8 x 3 x 5 = 7680 households (diagram 2).
17
PART C
The mother, who is informed adequately about the survey, will be interviewed if she
agrees to participate and if she is satisfied with the exception condition. The interviewer at
district was trained about the techniques of anthropometric measuments and questionnaire
interviewing. He/she will interview the mother using the survey questionnaire and then
weight and measure the height of both the mother and the child. The anthropometric data
of the child will be put in the WHO 2006 growth chart and will be informed to the mother
immediately. If the child is malnourished, the interviewer will ask the mother to have her
child checked at the health station. The nutritional status of mothers and children will be
communicated to the local authorities and health workers after the survey.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Nationwide
7680 households
PART C
Province 1
120 households
Commune 1
15 households
household
1
Village 1
5 households
Village 2
household
2
...household
5
Commune 2
Province 2
...Province 64
Commune
30
Village 3
Household
information
Individual
information
Diagram 2. Sampling procedure for household clusters survey
If household’s members are not home, the interviewers have to come back at another
time. If the interview can’t be completed, another household next - door with at least 3
members will be selected. The situations will be recorded for analysing data.
c) The implementation order
If the head of household agrees to answer after being informed about the survey, he/she
will be selected for the interview. The team which includes one interviewer/measures and
one dietary intake interviewer will work as the team leader assignment and follow the
instructed survey procedure.
First, the interviewer/measures ask the head of household about general information in
the household, specify the household according to the definition, then specify the member
who will answer which part in the questionnaire.
The dietary intake interviewer will ask the key person responsibe for preparing food in
the household about food intake for the last 24 hours. Beside, the dietary intake interviewer
will check if there is iodine in the salt at this household.
18
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
If there are children under-5 years old in the household, the interviewer will interview
their mothers and also ask about last 24 hours food intake for all of the under-5 children.
Anthropometric measurements will be conducted for all the household members (except
the disabled or seriously ill one) after the interview. Absent members will be measured at
another time when the interviewer comes back.
The nutritional status of children will be communicated to the local authorities and health
workers after the survey.
19
PART C
The anthropometric data of the child will be put in the WHO 2006 growth chart and will
be informed to the mother immediately. If the child is malnourished, the interviewer will ask
the mother to have her child checked at the health station. If the child has diarrhoea, he/she
should be provided ORS and counceling.
PART
D
FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
I.
GENERAL CHARACTERISTICS OF SURVEY SAMPLE
The survey has been conducted nationally with the sample of 94,256 children under 5
and 13,777 people above 5.
Nationally, the average household size was 4.3 people/household with quite similar
findings among regions, with the largest in the Central Highlands (4.7 people/household) and
smallest in the South East (4.1 people/household).
Details on household size and distribution of surveyed subjects are shown on Appendix
A (Table A1, A2 and A3).
PART D
Figure 4.1. Distribution of surveyed subjects by ethnic group
II. NUTRITIONAL STATUS
1. Nutritional status of children under 5
Main findings
The General Nutrition Survey revealed that the current prevalence of underweight was
17.5%, stunting was 29.3% and wasting was 7.1%. Although, the prevalence of undernutrition
is currently decreasing, overweight/obesity is on the rise.
Nutritional status of children under 5 is presented in Table 4.1.
Table 4.1. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition
in children under 5 years by sex – 2010
Percentage of children under 5 years who are underweight (weight-for-age < -2 Z-scores)
or severely underweight (weight-for-age < -3 Z-scores), stunted (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores)
or severely stunted (height-for-age < -3 Z-scores), wasted (weight-for-height < -2 Z-scores) or
severely wasted (weight-for-height< -3 Z-scores), and overweight (BMI-for-age >+2 Z-scores)
or obese (BMI-for-age >+3 Z-scores) by sex, Viet Nam 2009 General Nutrition Survey.
23
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Boys
Anthropometric
indicator
Underweight
(weight-for-age <-2Z)
Percent
Girls
N boys
Percent
N girls
Percent
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
18.4
16.6
17.5
[16.7; 20.1]
[12.3; 16.5]
47.474
94.256
1.8
2.4
2.1
(weight for age <-3Z)
[1.1; 2.5]
[1.6; 3.2]
[0.9; 3.2]
31.5
27.1
29.3
(height for age <-2Z)
[29.9; 33.1]
[25.3; 28.9]
47.474
Severe Stunting
(height for age <-3Z)
Wasting
(weight for height <-2Z)
(weight for height <-3Z)
Overweight
(BMI-for-age >+2Z)
10.5
[9.7; 13.1]
[8.1; 11.3]
[8.9; 12.1]
7.3
6.9
7.1
[5.6; 8.6]
(BMI-for-age >+3Z)
[6.6; 7.6]
46.782
92.345
3.6
4.0
3.8
[2.9; 4.3]
[3.2; 4.8]
[2.9.4.7]
6.7
5.1
5.6
[5.2; 7.2]
[4.2; 6.0]
45.563
Obese
94.256
9.7
45.563
Severe Wasting
[28.6; 30.0]
46.782
11.4
[6.6; 8.0]
Total N
[16.9; 18.1]
46.782
Severe Underweight
Stunting
PART D
Total
[2.2; 7.6]
46.782
92.345
2.8
2.7
2.8
[1.4; 4.2]
[1.2; 4.1]
[1.3; 4.3]
Weighted within province and adjusted for differences in province populations
* Confidence intervals
1.1. Underweight
Table 4.1. shows the prevalence of underweight in children under 5 currently estimated
at 17.5% (weight-for-age < -2 Z scores). This represents a medium level prevalence of low
weight-for-age in pre-school age children by WHO classification (WHO 1995). The prevalence
of severe underweight (<-3 Z scores) was 2.1%.
1.1.1. Underweight by age and sex
Figure 4.2. reveals a gradual increase in the prevalence of underweight with increasing
age in both boys and girls. Prior to 42 months old, the prevalence of underweight in boys
was higher than in girls, but not significantly. However, after 42 months, the prevalence was
24
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
the same for two sexes and began to trend toward a higher prevalence of underweight in
girls. There was no significant difference between the prevalence of underweight in boys and
girls. Severe underweight was also not significantly different between the two sexes.
(Appendix B – Table B3).
PART D
Figure 4.2. Prevalence of underweight by age and sex, Viet Nam 2010.
Plot of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by age and sex groups (n for males= 47.474, n for females =
46.782), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
The mean weight-for-age Z-score for boys (-0.84, 95%CI -0.79-0.92) was similar to that of
girls (-0.79, 95%CI -0.89, -0.70). For both sexes combined, the mean weight-for-age significantly
decreased with age from -0.44 (95% CI -0.60, -0.28) at 0-5 months of age to -1.19 (95% CI -1.36,
-1.01) at 54-59 months of age. The significant difference by age was seen in both boys and
girls (Appendix B – Table B4).
1.1.2. Underweight by ecological zone
The prevalence of underweight varied greatly amongst different ecological zones (see
Figure 4.3.). The highest levels of underweight were found on the Northern Midlands and
Mountain areas, the North Central area and Central Coastal area, and the Central Highlands.
The lowest prevalence was found in the Red River Delta and the South East.
25
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.3. Prevalence of underweight by ecological zone in Viet Nam, 2010.
Plot of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by ecological zones, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
There was a similar pattern for mean weight-for-age Z-score with the lowest mean
weight-for-age Z- score in the Central Highlands (-1.15, 95% CI -1.27, -1.04) and Northern
Midlands and Mountain areas (-1.11, 95% CI -1.33, -0.89) and the highest mean weight-forage in the Southeast (-0.50, 95% CI -0.71, -0.29).
The highest prevalence of severe underweight was found in Central Highlands (4.1% 95%
CI 3.23%, 4.97%), followed by Northern Midlands and Mountain areas (2.4%, 95% CI 1.9%,
2.9%), the Mekong River Delta (2.3%, 95% CI 1.64%, 3.0%), and the North Central and Central
Coastal areas (2.2%), and with the lowest prevalence in the Red River Delta (1.4%, 95% CI 0.9%,
1.9%), South East (1.2%, 95% CI 0.7%, 1.7 (Appendix B – Table B10).
1.1.3. Underweight by household wealth
As seen in Figure 4.4., the prevalence of underweight progressively decreased as household wealth increased. The level of underweight was approximately 3.4 times higher amongst
children < 60 months of age from the poorest households compared to children from the
wealthiest households. Nearly one quarter of the children from the poorest households were
underweight.
Figure 4.4. Prevalence of underweight by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010
26
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Plot of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 by household wealth groups, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
A similar pattern was revealed for mean weight-for-age Z-score, which progressively
decreased with increased household wealth from -1.26, (95% CI -1.36, -1.15) for children from
the poorest households to -0.39, (95% CI -0.51, -0.27) for the wealthiest households (Appendix
B – Table B8).
There was a decreased prevalence of severe underweight as household wealth increased
ranging from 6.7%, (95% CI 4.87%, 9.13%) in children from the poorest households down to
1.1%, (95% CI 0.61%, 2.12%) in the wealthiest households. (Appendix B – Table B7).
1.1.4. Underweight by urban/rural households
Figure 4.5. Prevalence of underweight by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by large and small cities, and rural non-poverty and poverty
communes Vietnam GNS 2009 - 2010.
Similar results were found for the mean weight-for-age Z-scores with the “large cities”
having the lowest mean weight-for-age Z-score (-0.31, 95% CI -0.63, 0.01). The prevalence of
underweight increased greatly from large to small cities, and furthermore at the commune
level. Prevalence in ”small cities” had more than double the rate of undernutrition found in
large cities, with corresponding lower z-scores (-0.67, 95% CI -0.83, -0.50) and the rural
“non-poverty communes” (-0.77, 95% CI -0.84, -0.70) and “poverty communes” (-0.92, 95%
CI -1.00, -0.85) further depict the disparity between urban and rural nutrition status.
27
PART D
The prevalence of underweight was significantly lower in “large cities” compared to “small
cities” and the rural “non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes” (see Figure 4.5). There
were no significant differences in the rate of underweight between “small cities” and the rural
“non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes”.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
As expected the lowest prevalence of severe underweight was found in “large cities”
(0.2%, 95% CI 0.03%, 1.52%), and a much higher prevalence in “small cities” (2.1%, 95% CI 1.4%,
2.8%), rural “poverty communes” (3.6%, 95% CI 2.70%, 4.65%) and “non-poverty communes”
(2.3%, 95% CI 1.6%, 3.0%). (Appendix B – Table B11).
1.1.5. Underweight by ethnicity
PART D
Figure 4.6. shows there is also a large variation in the prevalence of underweight by ethnic
group in Vietnam. The lowest prevalence was found amongst Kinh (14.3%), then Muong
(16.4%), Tay (21.3%), Nung (27%), Khome (27.2%), Dao (27.3%), Thai (28.4%), Ede (28.6%), and
Bana (28.9%). Among the surveyed minority groups, the highest rate was found in the
H’mong group (33.9%). It should be noted that in minority groups with small populations,
the sample size was not representative enough for the prevalence to be presented.
Figure 4.6. Prevalence of underweight by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by maternal ethnicity, Vietnam GNS 2009 - 2010.
1.1.6. Additional factors and underweight
a) Maternal height
Children born to shorter women (maternal height less than 145 cm) had a higher prevalence of underweight (26.3%, 95% CI 18.91%, 35.22%) than those born to taller women (15.3%,
95% CI 13.80%, 17.02%), This pattern was observed similarly among both girls and boys
(Appendix B – Table B11). These differences were also evident in the mean weight-for-age
Z-score, which was significantly lower for children bourne to shorter women (-1.33, 95%
CI -1.52, -1.15) than for children born to taller women (-0.79, 95% CI -0.86, -0.72) (Appendix B –
Table B12).
28
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
b) Maternal Body Mass Index
Maternal Body Mass Index (BMI) was also associated with underweight in children under
5 years old. Children born to women with low BMI (<18.5 Kg/m2) had a higher prevalence of
underweight (23.2%, 95% CI 19.5%, 27.4%) than children of women with higher BMI (13.4%,
95% CI 11.69%, 15.35%). Severe underweight (weight-for-age Z-score < -3.00) was also significantly higher amongst children born to mothers with low BMI (5.4%, 95% CI 3.71%, 7.92%)
than those of mothers with higher BMI (2.4%, 95% CI 1.81%, 3.23%) (Appendix B – Table B11).
As expected, the mean weight-for-age Z-scores were lower for children born to mothers with
low BMI (-1.13, 95% CI -1.25, -1.01) than for children of mothers with higher BMI (-0.71, 95% CI
-0.80, -0.62) (Appendix B – Table B12).
c) Maternal Education
d) Household Dietary Diversity
Underweight was also related to household dietary diversity with the prevalence of
underweight almost twice as high in children from households with low dietary diversity
(20.3%, 95% CI 17.88%, 22.89%) compared to children from households with high dietary
diversity (12.9%, 95% CI 10.72%, 15.44%) (Appendix B – Table B13). Similarly, there was a higher
mean weight-for-age Z-score for children from households with higher dietary diversity and
than for children from households with lower dietary diversity (Appendix B – Table B14).
1.1.7. Map of prevalence of underweight by province
The prevalence of underweight varied by province. Figure 4.7. depicts prevalence of
underweight by province with the severity of the prevalence of underweight indicated by
colour-coding. Amongst the total of 63 provinces, there were 20 provinces with high prevalence of underweight (over 20%), 41 provinces with medium prevalence (10-19%) and 2
provinces with low prevalence (under 10%).
The provinces with very high and high underweight prevalence were mainly clustered
in Northern Midland and Mountainous areas, the North Central area and the Central Highlands. The low prevalence provinces were all centred in large cities in the north, centre and
south of the country with the majority of these provinces in the south.
29
PART D
Another factor associated with underweight in children under 5 was maternal education.
Underweight progressively decreased as maternal education increased from 21.6% (95% CI
17.84%, 25.89%) for children whose mother had no education to 9.2% (95% CI 7.10%, 11.80%)
for children whose mother had some secondary education or higher. The same pattern was
found for severe underweight (Appendix B – Table B13). The mean weight-for-age Z-score also
progressively increased with increased maternal education (Appendix B – Table B14).
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.7. Map of the prevalence of underweight by province, Vietnam 2010. Five categories
of prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age < -2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years
mapped by 64 provinces of Viet Nam, GNS 2009 - 2010
30
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.1.8. Weight-for-age Z-score curves
Plotting the Z-score values for each anthropometric index provides a useful tool to
compare the nutritional status of a population to the reference population or to compare
different populations from different regions or with different characteristics.
The mean weight-for-age Z-score for children 0-4 years in Viet Nam was -0.82 (95%
CI -0.89, -0.75) indicating that the distribution of this anthropometric indicator was shifted
significantly below zero, the expected value of the reference distribution. The mean weightfor-age Z-score for girls (-0.79, 95% CI -0.89, -0.70) was slightly higher than for boys (-0.84, 95%
CI -0.92, -0.76). (Appendix B – Table B4).
Figure 4.8. Weight-for-age Z-score distribution by sex, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of Lowes curves for the weight-for-age Z-score distributions by sex for children aged
under 5 years old, compared to the curve for the WHO international growth standard (WHO
2006)
1.2. Stunting
Overall prevalence of stunting
Table 4.1. shows that the prevalence of stunting in children (height-for-age < -2 Z-scores)
under 5 years old in Viet Nam in 2010 was 29.3%. This is considered a high level prevalence
of low height-for-age in pre-school aged children (WHO 1995). The prevalence of severe
stunting (<-3 Z-scores) for children under 5 was 10.5%.
31
PART D
The shift of the entire weight-for-age distributions below the reference for children under
5 by sex is illustrated in Figure 4.8. The shape of the weight-for-age Z-score curve for both
males and females were almost identical and were very similar to the shape of the standard
reference curve although slightly wider and shifted to the left.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
1.2.1. Stunting by age and sex
Figure 4.9. Prevalence of stunting by age and sex, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by age and sex groups, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
Figure 4.9. reveals a gradual increase in the prevalence of stunting with increasing age
for boys that reaches a plateau at 24-29 months. For most age groups the prevalence of
stunting is slightly higher for boys than for girls. None of these gender differences appear to
be statistically significant. There was no trend of increasing prevalence of severe stunting in
either girls or boys, but severe stunting was slightly higher in boys than in girls (Appendix B –
Table B15).
The mean height-for-age Z-score for boys, -0.92 (95% CI -1.03, -0.81), was slightly lower
than that for girls, -0.80 (95% CI -0.91, -0.68), but not significantly different. For both sexes
combined, the mean height-for-age Z-score significantly decreased with age from-0.18 (95%
CI -0.45, 0.10) at 0-5 months of age to -1.21 (95% CI -1.45, -0.96) at 54-59 months of age. There
were similar trends for mean height-for-age for both boys and girls (Appendix B – Table B16).
1.2.2. Stunting by ecological zone
The prevalence of stunting varied greatly across the different ecological zones of Viet
Nam (see Figure 4.10.). The highest levels of stunting were found in the Northern Midland
and Mountain areas, the North Central and Central Coastal areas, and the Central Highland
areas. The lowest prevalence was in the Red River Delta and the South East zones.
32
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.10. Prevalence of stunting by ecological zone, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence intervals
in children under 5 years by ecological zones, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
There was a similar pattern for mean height-for-age Z-score with the lowest mean heightfor-age Z- score in Northern Midlands and Mountain areas at -1.18 (95% CI -1.45, -0.92), the
Central Highlands with a score of -1.18 (95% CI -1.49, -0.86), and the highest mean height-forage in the South East at -0.60 (95% CI -0.79, -0.42) (Appendix B – Table B10).
The highest prevalence of severe stunting was found in Central Highlands at 6.8% (95%
CI 4.23%, 10.67%), followed by Northern Midlands and Mountain areas with 4.4% (95% CI
2.94%, 6.52%), the Mekong River Delta 3.90% (95% CI 2.54%, 5.94%), and the North Central
and Central Coastal areas with 3.7% prevalence (95% CI 2.44%, 5.64%), and the lowest rate
found in the Red River Delta at 1.7% (95% CI 0.95%, 3.12%), and the South East 2.1% (95% CI
1.04%, 4.06%) (Appendix B – Table B9).
1.2.3. Stunting by household wealth
Figure 4.11. shows that the prevalence of stunting decreased as household wealth
increased. The level of stunting was approximately 3 times higher amongst children < 60
months of age from the poorest households compared to children from the wealthiest households. More than one third of the children from the poorest households were stunted.
33
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.11. Prevalence of stunting by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence intervals
in children under 5 years old by household wealth groups, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
A similar pattern was revealed for mean height-for-age Z-score, which progressively
decreased with increasing household wealth from -1.25, (95% CI -1.46, -1.05) for children from
the poorest households to -0.50, (95% CI -0.62, -0.38) for the wealthiest households (Appendix
B – Table B8).
1.2.4. Stunting by urban/rural households
The prevalence of stunting was significantly lower in “large cities” compared to “small
cities”, rural “non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes” (see Figure 4.12.). There were
no significant differences in stunting between “small cities” and the rural “non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes”.
Figure 4.12. Prevalence of stunting by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010
34
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Plot of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence intervals
in children under 5 years by large and small cities, and rural non-poverty and poverty
communes, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
Similar results were found for the mean height-for-age Z-scores. The “large cities” report
having the highest mean height-for-age Z-score (-0.30, 95% CI -0.51, -0.1-0.31), “small cities”
with lower scores, and the lowest scores found in rural “non-poverty communes” (-0.94, 95%
CI -1.05, -0.83) and “poverty communes” (-1.01, 95% CI -1.27, -0.75), (Appendix B – Table B12).
As expected, the lowest prevalence of severe stunting was found in “large cities” (4.1%,
95% CI 1.70%, 9.60%), and a much higher prevalence in “small cities” (4.3%, 95% CI 2.79%,
6.67%), rural “poverty communes” (11.6%, 95% CI 8.00%, 16.40%) and “non-poverty communes”
(8.4%, 95% CI 6.70%, 10.60%), (Appendix B – Table B11).
The survey reveals a large variation exists in the prevalence of stunting by ethnic group
in Viet Nam. Figure 4.13. shows that the lowest prevalence was found in the Kho me, Kinh
and Muong children, with the highest prevalence noted in H’mong, Dao, and Bana children.
Figure 4.13. Prevalence of stunting by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence intervals
in children under 5 years by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
1.2.6. Additional factors and stunting
a) Maternal height
Children born by shorter women (maternal height less than 145 cm) had a higher prevalence of stunting (38.2%, 95% CI 30.20%, 46.90%) than children born by taller women (21.4%,
95% CI 19.40%, 23.50%). This pattern was similarly observed in girls and boys (Appendix B –
35
PART D
1.2.5. Stunting by ethnicity
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B11). These differences were also evident for the mean height-for-age Z-scores, which
were significantly lower for children born to shorter women (-1.47, 95% CI -1.74, -1.19) than
for children born to taller women (-0.82, 95% CI -0.90, -0.73) (Appendix B – Table B12).
PART D
b) Maternal Body Mass Index
Maternal Body Mass Index (BMI) was also associated with stunting in children under 5.
Children born to women with low BMI (<18.5 Kg/m2) had a significantly higher prevalence of
stunting (32.6%, 95% CI 29.50%, 35.70%) than children born to women with higher BMI (20.6%,
95% CI 18.40%, 22.90%). Severe stunting (height-for-age Z-score < -3.00) was also higher
amongst children born to mothers with low BMI (11.3%, 95% CI 8.20%, 15.20%) compared to
those born to mothers with higher BMI (6.8%, 95% CI 5.40%, 9.40%) although the confidence
intervals overlap (Appendix B – Table B11). As expected, the mean height-for-age Z-score was
also lower for children born to mothers with low BMI (-1.21, 95% CI -1.84, -0.94) than for
children born to mothers with higher BMI (-0.76, 95% CI -0.85, -0.67) (Appendix B – Table b12).
c) Maternal Education
Another factor associated with stunting in children under 5 was maternal education.
Stunting progressively decreased as maternal education increased from 38.6% (95% CI 35.3%,
41.7%) for children whose mother had no education to 20.1% (95% CI 18.8, 22.2%) in children
whose mother had some secondary education or higher. The same pattern was found for
severe stunting (Appendix B – Table B17). The mean height-for-age Z-score also progressively
increased with increased maternal education from -1.20 (95% CI -1.38, -1.02) for children
whose mother had no education down to -0.55 (95% CI -0.7, -0.4) for children whose mother
had some secondary education or higher (Appendix B – Table B18).
d) Household Dietary Diversity
Stunting was also related to household dietary diversity. Children from households with
low dietary diversity had a prevalence of stunting 1.5 times higher with a rate of 33.6% (95%
CI 35.5%, 41.7%) compared to 22.1% (95% CI 18.9%, 24.3%) in children from households with
high dietary diversity (Appendix B – Table B17). Similarly there was a higher mean height-forage Z-score for children from households with higher dietary diversity and than for children
from households with lower dietary diversity (Appendix B – Table B18).
1.2.7. Map of the prevalence of stunting by province
The prevalence of stunting varied significantly by province. Figure 4.14. depicts
categories of stunting prevalence by province with the level of stunting indicated by
colour-coding.
There were 9 provinces (14.1%) with very high prevalence of stunting, 11 provinces
(17.2%) with high prevalence, 29 provinces (48.4%) with medium prevalence and 13 provinces
(20.3%) with low prevalence.
36
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The very high and high stunting prevalence provinces were mainly clustered in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas, the North Central and Central Coastal area, and the Central
Highlands. The provinces with low prevalence were all centred around large cities in the
north, centre and south of the country with the majority of these provinces in the south.
PART D
Figure 4.14. Map of the prevalence of stunting by province, Viet Nam 2010. Seven categories
of prevalence of stunting (height-for-age < -2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years old mapped by
64 provinces of Viet Nam, GNS 2009 - 2010
37
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.2.8. Height-for-age Z-score curves
The mean height-for-age Z-score for children under 5 in Viet Nam was -0.86 (95% CI -0.94,
-0.78) indicating that the distribution of this anthropometric indicator was shifted significantly
below zero, the expected value of the reference distribution. The mean height-for-age Zscore for girls, -0.80 (95% CI -0.91, -0.68) was slightly higher than for boys, -0.92 (95% CI -1.03,
-0.81)(Appendix B – Table B16).
PART D
The shift of the height-for-age distributions below the reference for children under 5 by
sex is illustrated in Figure 4.15. The height-for-age Z-score curve for females was higher than
for males but both were wider than the standard reference curve and shifted far to the left
the reference curve. The shape of the curve for males was slightly wider and shifted further
to the left than for females indicating slightly poorer linear growth in males.
Figure 4.15. Height-for-age Z-score distributions by sex, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of Lowes curves for the height-for-age Z-score distributions for children under 5 years
by sex, compared to the curve for the 2006 WHO international growth reference (WHO 2006),
Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
1.3.Wasting
Overall prevalence of wasting
Table 4.1. shows the prevalence of wasting in children under 5 (weight-for-height < -2 Zscores) in Viet Nam in 2009 was 7.1%. This is a medium level prevalence of low weight-forheight in pre-school aged children (WHO 1995). The prevalence of severe wasting (<-3
Z-scores) for children under 5 was 3.8%.
1.3.1. Wasting by age and sex
There was not a clear pattern for wasting by age- unlike stunting and underweight (see
Figure 4.16). There was a tendency for higher prevalence in children aged 12 to 35 months
and again at 54-59 months. For most age groups the prevalence of wasting was slightly
38
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
higher for boys than for girls, although none of the gender differences were significant. The
prevalence of severe wasting was highest at ages 12-17, 18-23 and 30-35 months of age.
There was no difference in the prevalence of severe wasting by sex (Appendix B – Table B10).
PART D
Figure 4.16. Prevalence of wasting by age and sex, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence intervals in children under 5 years by age and sex groups (n for males=47.474, n for females =
46.782), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
The mean weight-for-height Z-score for boys, -0.48 (95% CI -0.59, -0.38) was similar to that
for girls, -0.45 (95% CI -0.57, -0.33) (Appendix B – Table B20). There was not a clear pattern of
mean weight-for-height Z-score by age.
1.3.2. Wasting by ecological zone
The prevalence of wasting varied across the different ecological zones of Viet Nam (see
Figure 4.17). High levels of wasting were found in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas,
the Central Highlands, and the North Central and Central Coastal areas. The lowest prevalence was in the South East and the Red River Delta zones.
Figure 4.17. Prevalence of wasting by ecological zone in Viet Nam, 2010
39
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Plot of prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years old by ecological zones (n= 3422), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
PART D
There was a similar pattern for mean weight-for-height Z-scores with the lowest mean
weight-for-height Z-score in the Central Highlands (-0.67, 95% CI -0.83, -0.50), the Northern
Midland and Mountain areas (-0.63, 95% CI -0.87, -0.38), the North Central and Central Coastal
area (-0.63, 95% CI -0.81, -0.44) and the Mekong River Delta zone (-0.59, 95% CI -0.73, -0.45).
The highest mean weight-for-height was found in the South East (-0.17, 95% CI -0.45, 0.11)
(Appendix B – Table B10).
The highest prevalence of severe wasting (weight-for-height <-3 Z-scores) was found in
Northern Midland and Mountain areas (7.5% 95% CI 5.5%, 10.1%), Central Highlands (7.2%
95% CI 4.6%, 11.1%), the North Central and Central Coastal area (6.5% 95% CI 4.1%, 10.2%),
and follows the same pattern found for wasting (Appendix B – Table B9).
1.3.3. Wasting by household wealth
The prevalence of wasting slowly decreased as household wealth increased. The level of
wasting was approximately twice as high amongst children < 60 months of age from the
poorest households compared to children from the wealthiest households, although the
levels were similar for children from poorer and middle level households.
Figure 4.18. Prevalence of wasting by household wealth, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years old by household wealth groups, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
Figure 4.18. reveals a similar pattern to the mean weight-for-height Z-score, which
progressively decreased with increased household wealth from -1.25 (95% CI -1.46, -1.05) for
children from the poorest households to -0.50 (95% CI -0.62, -0.38) for the wealthiest households (Appendix B – Table B8).
40
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.3.4. Wasting by urban/rural households
The prevalence of wasting was significantly lower in “large cities” compared to the rural
“non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes” (see Figure 4.19.). There was no significant
difference in stunting between “small cities” and the rural “non-poverty communes” and
“poverty communes”.
PART D
Figure 4.19. Prevalence of wasting by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years old by urban/rural regions, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
Similar results were found for the mean weight-for- height Z-scores. The “large cities” had
the lowest mean weight-for- height Z-score (-0.17, 95% CI -0.54, 0.21), with the “small cities”
reporting z-scores slightly lower (-0.27, 95% CI -0.46, -0.09), and the rural “non-poverty
communes” (-0.53, 95% CI -0.77, -0.30) and “poverty communes” (-0.57, 95% CI -0.68, -0.47) with
similar and much lower values (Appendix B – Table B12).
As expected, the lowest prevalence of severe stunting was found in “large cities” (4.1%,
95% CI 1.70%, 9.60%), with a much higher prevalence in “small cities” (4.3%, 95% CI 2.79%,
6.67%), rural “poverty communes” (11.6%, 95% CI 8.00%, 16.40%) and “non-poverty communes”
(8.4%, 95% CI 6.70%, 10.60%) (Appendix B – Table B11).
1.3.5. Wasting by ethnicity
There was a large variation in the prevalence of underweight among ethnic groups in
Viet Nam. The lowest prevalence was found in the H’mong and Kho me children. Prevalence
was highest amongst the Muong, Thai, and Bana. Data on wasting by ethnic group are
presented in figure 4.20. Caution is needed in interpreting these results for individual ethnic
minorities because of the small sample sizes (see Appendix B – Table B5).
41
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.20. Prevalence of wasting by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height <-2 Z-scores) and 95% confidence
intervals in children under 5 years by maternal ethnicity, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010
1.3.6. Additional factors and wasting
a) Maternal Body Mass Index
Maternal Body Mass Index (BMI) was also associated with wasting in children under 5.
Children born by women with low BMI (<18.5 Kg/m2) had a higher prevalence of wasting
(15.9% 95% CI 12.74%, 19.57%) than children of women with higher BMI (11.4% 95% CI 9.81%,
13.23%), although the confidence intervals overlap.
Severe wasting defined as weight-for-height Z score < -3.00, was also higher amongst
children born to mothers with low BMI (12.3%, 95% CI 9.20%, 16.20%) than those born to
mothers with higher BMI (7.8%, 95% CI 6.40%, 9.40%) although the confidence intervals overlap (Appendix B – Table B11). As expected, the mean height-for-age Z-score was lower for
children born to mothers with low BMI (-1.16, 95% CI -1.26, -1.00) compared to children born
to mothers with higher BMI (-0.74, 95% CI -0.85, -0.53) (Appendix B – Table B12).
b) Maternal Education
Maternal education is another factor associated with wasting and severe wasting in
children under 5 years old. Wasting and severe wasting was higher in children whose mother
had only primary education compared to those whose mother had some secondary education or higher. However, the difference was not significant (Appendix B – Table B12). Underweight progressively decreased as maternal education increased from 30.0% (95% CI 25.2%,
35.1%) for children whose mother had no education to 15.5% (95% CI 12.2, 19.4%) for children
whose mother had some secondary education or higher. The same pattern was found for
severe underweight (Appendix D – Detailed Results, Table 1). The mean weight-for-height
Z-score also increased with higher levels of maternal education from -0.62 (95% CI -0.78, -
42
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
0.45) for children whose mother had no education to -0.25 (95% CI -0.42, -0.08) for children
whose mother had some secondary education or higher (Appendix B – Table B22).
1.3.7. Map of the prevalence of wasting by province
PART D
Figure 4.21. Map of prevalence of wasting by province, Viet Nam 2010.
The prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height< -2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years mapped by
64 provinces of Viet Nam, GNS 2009 - 2010
43
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1.3.8. Weight-for-Height Z-score curves
PART D
The mean weight-for-height Z-score for children under 5 in Viet Nam was -0.47 (95%
CI -0.55, -0.38) indicating that the distribution of this anthropometric indicator was shifted
significantly below zero, the expected value of the reference distribution. The mean weightfor-height Z-score for girls (-0.45, 95% CI -0.57, -0.33) was slightly higher than for boys (-0.48,
95% CI -0.59, -0.38). (Appendix B – Table B20).
Figure 4.22. Weight-for-height Z-score distributions by sex, Viet Nam 2010
Plot of Lowes curves for the weight-for-height Z-score distributions for children under 5
years by sex, compared to the curve for the 2006 WHO international growth reference (WHO
2006), GNS 2009 - 2010.
1.4. Combined wasting and stunting.
The analysis of combined data on wasting and stunting provides a better interpretation
of nutrition indicators, which can help to develop more accurate nutrition interventions for
Vietnam. In Figure 4.23, the categories include normal, wasting, stunting and combined
wasting and stunting. The ‘normal’ category may also include some underweight, overweight
and obese children, however, this method of categorization has been accepted by WHO and
nutrition experts to guide interventions.
Prevalence of wasting and stunting by age group
Figure 4.23. indicates the prevalence of children who are wasted only, stunted only,
combined wasted and stunted, and not wasted or stunted. It is shown that the proportion of
children who are neither wasted nor stunted is highest in children under 6 months old and
decreased with age. The prevalence of wasting (with or without stunting) is highest in
children 6-35 months old and peaks at 12-23 months of age.
44
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The prevalence of stunting (with or without wasting) was found to be lowest in the first
year of life and increased by age, with the highest rate seen between 48-59 months. The
prevalence of combined wasting and stunting is low in all age groups, but is the highest
between 48-59 months. This data suggests that interventions to reduce stunting should be
initiated prior to 24 months of age. Furthermore, interventions aimed at the reduction of
wasting will contribute to decreased stunting.
PART D
Figure 4.23. Prevalence of wasting and stunting by age, Viet Nam 2010
Plots of the prevalence of wasting alone, stunting alone, wasting and stunting combined
and not wasted or stunted for children under 5 by age, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
1.4.1. Stunting and wasting by sex
Figure 4.24. shows the prevalence of stunting and wasting by sex, indicating that malnutrition is more frequent in boys than girls for all 3 indicators, but not significantly. This is
similar to the trend of diarrhoea rate, suggesting that there is no difference in child feeding
amongst the 2 sexes that influences child malnutrition in Vietnam.
Figure 4.24. Prevalence of wasting and stunting by sex, Viet Nam 2010
45
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Plots of the prevalence of wasting alone, stunting alone, wasting and stunting combined
and not wasted or stunted for children under 5 by sex, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
2. Trends of undernutrition in children under 5
PART D
2.1.Trends at the national level from 2000-2010
Figure 4.25. The prevalence of undernutriton in children under 5 from 2000-2010
Underweight
The prevalence of underweight (weight-for-age < -2 Z-scores) for children under 5 in the
last 10 years is plotted in Figure 4.25. Over the 10-year period from 2000 to 2010, there was
a steady reduction in the prevalence of underweight. By 2010, the prevalence of underweight
had significantly decreased by approximately 42% compared to the levels in 2000. The
average reduction rate was 1.26%/year for the last 10 years.
Stunting
The prevalence of stunting (height-for-age < -2 Z-scores) for children under in the last 10
years in Viet Nam is plotted in Figure 4.25. Similar to underweight, over the 10-year period
from 2000 to 2010, there was a steady reduction in the prevalence of stunting. By 2010, the
prevalence of stunting had significantly decreased by approximately 32% compared to the
levels in 2000, with an average reduction rate of 1.4% per year for the last 10 years.
As it has been observed in many countries, the lower the level of stunting prevalence,
the slower the rate of reduction [26,27].
Wasting
The prevalence of wasting (weight-for-height < -2 Z-scores) in children under 5 in the last
10 years is also shown in Figure 4.25. From 2000 to 2010 there was no significant improvement in the prevalence of wasting. The prevalence of wasting in Vietnam has long been
46
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
considered at the medium level by WHO’s classification. One theory is that since Vietnamese
children are both thin and short, but in proportion they trigger more often for cut offs of
wasting. However, rapid surveys in disaster-affected and disadvantaged areas have shown a
higher wasting prevalence than in other areas [23].
2.2. Trends of undernutrition by ecological zone
Underweight
Figure 4.26. The prevalence of underweight in children under 5 by ecological zone
Figure 4.27. The prevalence of underweight in children under 5 by ecological zone
47
PART D
Plots of underweight in children under 5 by ecological zone (Figure 4.26. and 4.27) reveal
decreased prevalence of underweight in all ecological zones from 2000-2010. The greatest
reduction in underweight was observed in the “Central Coast areas” (47% reduction from the
prevalence in 2000), the “Red River Delta” (46% reduction), and the “South East” (46% reduction),
although baseline levels for each zone varied. The lowest rates of improvement were seen in
the “Northwest” (35% reduction), “Central Highlands” (32% reduction), and the Northeast (37%
reduction). In general, however, the rate of reduction in undernutrition was over 30% in all
regions from 2000-2010.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Stunting
PART D
The prevalence of stunting for children under 5 by ecological zone is summarized in
Figure 4.28. and 4.29. Data reveal improvement in the prevalence of stunting in all ecological
zones from 1989-1990 to 2010. The greatest improvements in stunting were found in the
“Central Highlands” (39% reduction), Southern Central areas (36% reduction), and Northern
Central areas (36% reduction). The overall rate of reduction was over 30% in all regions from
2000-2010.
Figure 4.28. The prevalence of stunting in children under 5 by ecological zone
Figure 4.29. The prevalence of stunting in children under 5 by ecological zone
48
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Wasting
Plots of the prevalence of wasting for children under 5 by ecological zone (Figure 4.30
and 4.31) reveal no significant trends in improving the mean weight-for-height in all ecological zones from 2000 to 2010.
PART D
Figure 4.30. The prevalence of wasting of children under 5 by ecological zone
Figure 4.31. The prevalence of wasting of children under 5 by ecological zone
49
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
2.3. Overnutrition in children under 5
This report uses the cut off values for BMI-for-age to define overweight and obesity in
children aged 0-4 years and 5-19 years, using the WHO growth references 20051.
PART D
For children under 5, the WHO has proposed that children with BMI-for-age or weightfor-height from >+1 Z-score (or standard deviations) to + 2 Z-scores above the growth
reference mean be described as “at risk of overweight”, for those above >+ 2 Z-scores to + 3 Z
score as “overweight”, and for > + 3 Z -score as “obesity”2. This chapter will present selected
results on overweight and obesity.
As seen in Table 4.1., the overall prevalence of overweight and obesity (weight-for-height
> +2 Z-scores) in children under 5 was 5.6%, and the prevalence of obesity alone (weight-forheight >+3 Z-scores) was 2.8%. These results indicate that the prevalence of overweight/
obesity in children under 5 is over 5%, the control level defined by NNS period 2010-2010.
Prevalence in urban areas was even higher than the average at 6.5% (Figure 4.32).
Figure 4.32. The prevalence of overnutrition in children under 5 (WHZ < +2 Z-scores)
2.4.Conclusions
Overall, data regarding nutritional status of children under 5 in Viet Nam in 2010 indicated
that undernutrition remains a major public health problem, although remarkable gains have
been made over the last 10 years.
•
Underweight (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years of age in Viet
Nam was 17.5% and is regarded as a medium high level of prevalence. The weight-
1
de Onis M. and Lobstein T. Defining obesity risk status in the general childhood population: Which cut-offs should
we use? International Journal of Pediatric Obesity, 2010; 5: 458–460
2
World Health Organization. Training course on child growth assessment. Geneva: World Health Organization;
2008. From: http://www.who.int/childgrowth/training/en/. Accessed 5 May 2011
50
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
for-age Z score curves revealed that the distributions were far shifted from the average distribution toward undernutrition (Figure 4.8).
The prevalence of stunting (height-for-age <-2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years of
age in Viet Nam remained just above the threshold of 20% and is still regarded as a
serious public health problem. The height-for-age Z score curves revealed that the
distributions were shifted far to the side of undernutrition for both boys and girls
(Figure 4.15)
•
Wasting (weight-for-age <-2 Z-scores) in children under 5 years of age in Viet Nam
was 5-10% in most provinces and is regarded as a medium level of prevalence. There
is no trend toward improvement in wasting by age (Figure 4.16) and no difference
by sex. Geographical variation for wasting is not as great compared with that of underweight and stunting since most of the provinces range in medium level 5-9% (Appendix B1). Only the two most populous cities of Hanoi and Ho Chi Minh City have
rates less than 5%.
•
The overall prevalence of “overweight and obesity” (weight-for-height > +2 Z-scores)
was 5.6%, and the prevalence of obesity alone (weight-for-height >+3 Z-score) was
2.8%. These results indicate that the trend of overweight and obesity was on the rise
in children under 5 between 2000-2010.
Chronic malnutrition
Programs focusing on nutrition in children in order to accelerate reductions in stunting
should remain a national priority in Viet Nam. Future programs need to focus on child stunting prevention in the 7 provinces (11% of total) with a very high prevalence of stunting (>40%)
and the 36 provinces (56% of total) with high prevalence of stunting (30-39%) (See map, Figure
4.14). Furthermore, the rate of stunting by age reveals a steady increase in prevalence until
24-29 months of age, after which, it remained constant. This indicates that programs to
prevent stunting are most critical in the first 2 years of life as well as during pregnancy and
interventions should be targeted to these groups.
Stunting was also more prevalent in children from poor households highlighting the
need to target prevention programs to households with low income. This is further reinforced
by evidence of an association of stunting with poor maternal nutrition (short stature and low
BMI), lower levels of maternal education and households with less dietary diversity.
Geographic targeting of programs to areas with the highest prevalence of stunting
should largely focus on the Northern Midland and Mountain areas, the North Central and
Central Coastal areas, and the Central Highlands. These geographic areas have large ethnic
minority populations and are economically disadvantaged compared to other regions in Viet
Nam placing them at increased risk for undernutrition.
Additionally, stunting prevention programs should ensure that communication strategies will effectively reach women with lower levels of education. Given the correlation between low levels of maternal education and higher rates of undernutrition in children, it is
vital that messages are presented in clear and simple language.
51
PART D
•
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The association of stunting with children from households with lower dietary diversity
also indicates a need for programs that will counsel parents on how to improve the dietary
diversity of complementary feeding for children from 6 months of age onwards.
Lastly, the high rate of stunting in children less than 6 months of age (approximately 11%),
indicates the need for programs to prevent stunting which should start during pregnancy.
3. Nutritional status of children 5-19 years old
3.1. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition in children from 5-10 years old
PART D
Table 4.2. Prevalence of undernutrition and overnutrition
in children 5-10 years of age by sex, Vietnam 2010
Percentage of children 5-10 years of age who are underweight (weight-for-age< -2 Z-scores)
or severely underweight (weight-for-age < -3 Z-scores), wasted (weight-for-height < -2 Z-scores)
or severely wasted (weight-for-height < -3 Z-scores), and percentage of children 5-19 years who
are stunted (height-for-age <-2 Z- scores) or severely stunted (height-for-age < -3 Z scores), wasted
(BMI-for-age < -2 Z-scores) or severely wasted (BMI-for-age < -3 Z-scores), and overweight
(BMI-for-age >+1 Z-score) or obese (BMI-for-age >+2 Z- scores) by sex, Viet Nam 2009 - 2010
General Nutrition Survey.
Percent
Anthropometric
indicator
%
Percent
N
boys
%
Percent
N
girls
%
[95% CI*]
[95% CI*]
[95% CI*]
25.9
22.6
24.2
(weight-for-age <-2Z)
23.29, 28.64
20.21, 25.17
22.2, 26.26
Severe Underweight
7.7
6.8
7.2
(weight for age <-3Z)
6.16, 9.66
5.43, 8.48
6.06, 8.64
27.5
19.5
23.4
25.76, 29.38
17.98, 21.14
22.05, 24.88
Underweight
1850
Stunting
(height for age <-2Z)
1989
4665
Severe Stunting
(height for age <-3Z)
Wasting
3838
1873
9538
8.6
5.8
7.1
7.5, 9.75
4.95, 6.69
6.38, 7.96
14.9
18.6
16.8
929
(weight for height <-2Z)
52
11.97, 18.35
15.6, 22.09
Total
N
1849
14.5, 19.29
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Percent
Anthropometric
indicator
%
Severe Wasting
Percent
N
boys
%
[95% CI*]
[95% CI*]
4.8
5.6
Percent
N
girls
%
[95% CI*]
5.2
929
(weight for height <-3Z)
Overweight
(BMI-for-age >+1Z)
3.89, 8.12
3.93, 6.88
10.2
6.8
8.5
8.83, 11.73
5.72, 8.05
7.45, 9.60
4871
9551
3.2
1.8
2.5
2.63, 3.93
1.31, 2.42
2.07, 2.99
Weighted within province and to adjust for differences in province populations
* Confidence intervals
† Underweight and wasting using weight-for-height are restricted to children 5-10 years
because the WHO growth reference does not extend beyond 10 years of age
3.2. Overweight and obesity in children 5-19 years old
In this age group, children with BMI-for-age from >+1 Z-score to + 2 Z-scores above the
growth reference mean are described as “overweight” (+1 Z-score in the new WHO growth reference for children 5-19 years is equivalent to an adult BMI of 25 kg/m2). Children 5-19 years with
BMI-for-age >+ 2 Z-scores to + 3 Z score are designated as “obese” (+2 Z-scores is equivalent
to an adult BMI of 29.7 kg/m2). Finally for those with BMI-for-age > + 3 Z-scores are designated
as “severely obese” (+3 Z-scores is equivalent to an adult BMI of 35.5kg/m2).
Table 4.2. shows that the prevalence of overweight (BMI-for-age > +1 Z-score) for children
aged 5-19 years old in Viet Nam in 2009 was 8.5%. Prevalence of obesity (BMI-for-age > +2 Zscores) was 2.5%, and the prevalence of severe obesity (BMI-for-age >+3 Z-scores) was only
0.7% (95% CI 0.51%, 0.95%).
Relevant factors of overweight and obesity in children 5-19 years old
3.2.1. Overweight and obesity by age and sex
Figure 4.33. demonstrates the gradual reduction of overweight and obesity as age
increases. The prevalence of overweight and obesity is higher in boys than girls but is only
statistically significant for the age group from 5-7 years old. The same pattern is seen with
obesity (BMI-for-age >+2 Z-scores), with a value of 6.3% (95% CI 4.90%, 7.97%) in children
5-7 years old and only 0.1% (95% CI 0.02%, 0.40%) in children 17-19 years old. There is almost
no statistical significance between the prevalence of obesity in boys and in girls, except for
5-7 year old group.
53
PART D
(BMI-for-age >+2Z)
1849
2.99, 7.51
4680
Obesity
Total
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The age pattern of overweight suggests that risk factors relevant to diet and physical
activities seem to influence younger children more than adolescents. It also indicates that in
the future, there will be an increase of obesity prevalence in children and adolescents in
Vietnam.
3.2.2. Overweight and obesity by ethnicity
PART D
As seen in Figure 4.34., there was a small variation in the prevalence of overweight and
obesity in children 5-19 years old by ethnic groups in Viet Nam. The highest prevalence was
amongst two ethnic minorities the Muong and Thai, and the least overweight prevalence
was found in the Khome, but the difference is not statistically significant.
Figure 4.33. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by age and sex.
Prevalence of overweight (BMI-for-age <+1 Z-score) and 95% confidence intervals
in children from 5 to 19 years by age and sex groups, Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
Figure 4.34. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by maternal ethnicity.
Prevalence of overweight (BMI-for-age <+1 Z-score) and 95% confidence intervals
in children from 5 to 19 years by maternal ethnicity (n=9043), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
54
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
3.2.3. Overweight and obesity by household wealth
Figure 4.35. shows the prevalence of overweight and obesity slowly increased with
increased household wealth. In urban areas, however, the level of overweight/obesity
increased remarkably from 7.5% (95% CI 4.04%, 13.35%) in children from the poorest households to 17.9% (95% CI 13.46%, 23.36%) in children from wealthiest households. There was
no relationship between household wealth index and overweight/obesity in the rural areas.
PART D
Figure 4.35. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by household wealth.
Plots of the prevalence of overweight (BMI-for-age <+1 Z-score) and 95% confidence intervals
in children from 5-19 years by household wealth (n=9043), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
3.2.4. Overweight and obesity by ecological zone
Figure 4.36. shows that the prevalence of overweight/obesity was similar in almost all
ecological regions except for the South East, where the prevalence was more than double
the rate found in any other area.
The prevalence of overweight and obesity was higher in boys than in girls in most
ecological regions, with the exception of the South East with the prevalence of 25.7% (95%
CI 17.42%, 36.22 %) in boys and 13.3% (95% CI 7.83%, 21.72%) in girls.
55
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.36. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by ecological zone.
Prevalence of overweight (BMI-for-age <+1 Z-score) and 95% confidence intervals
in children from 5-19 years by ecological zone (n=9043), Viet Nam GNS 2009 - 2010.
3.2.5. Overweight and obesity by urban/rural
The prevalence of overweight and obesity was significantly higher in “large cities”
compared to “small cities”, and rural “non-poverty communes” and “poverty communes” (see
Figure 4.37.). The prevalence of overweight and obesity in “small cities” was significantly higher
compared to the rural “poverty communes”, but not significantly higher when compared to
the rural “non-poverty communes”.
Figure 4.28. shows that there is clear age pattern in large cities as the prevalence of
overweight and obesity is high in younger age group and it is highest at nearly 50% in
children 5-7 years old. This is also the age group with highest rate of obesity (8.7%, 95% CI
3.44%, 20.16%). There is also a clear difference by sex in younger age group in large cities
(twice the rate in boys than in girls), while overweight by gender remains similar in older age
groups. The current prevalence of overweight and obesity prevalence among young boys in
large cities, is staggeringly high at an estimated 50% or higher.
Figure 4.37. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by region
56
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.38. Prevalence of overweight in children from 5-19 years old by age and region
3.2.6. Additional factors and overweight/obesity
Maternal BMI status
Maternal BMI status is associated with the prevalence of overweight and obesity in
children 5-19 years old. The prevalence of overweight and obesity was higher for children of
overweight mothers with BMI > 23 kg/m2 (9.6% 95% CI 8.31%, 11.00%) than for mothers with
BMI < 23 kg/m2 (6.3%, 95% CI 4.46%, 8.74%).
Maternal education
Another factor related to the prevalence of overweight/obesity in children 5-19 years old
is maternal education level. The prevalence of overweight and obesity increased with
increased maternal education from 6.2% (95% CI 4.84%, 7.92%) for mothers with no education
to 15.4% (95% CI 11.67%, 19.92%) for women with secondary education or higher.
3.3. Conclusion
Overall the nutritional status of children 5-19 years old in Viet Nam shows that undernutrition remains a major public health concern, coupled with emerging trends of increased
overweight and obesity, especially in large cities.
4. Nutritional status of adults (over 19 years old)
4.1.Overall nutritional status on adults over 19 years old
4.1.1. Chronic energy deficiency (CED)
CED defined by BMI (BMI<18.5 kg/m2) was presented in Table 31 – Appendix 31.
The prevalence of CED in males was 15.8% (CI95%: 14.6-17.0) and in females was 18.5%
(CI95%: 17.4-19.7). CED is significantly more prevalent in females than in male. The total prevalence is 17.2% (CI95%: 16.4-18.1).
57
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.39. Prevalence of CED in adults over 19 years old in 2000 and 2010
It can be observed that the prevalence of CED in 2010 reduced in almost all age groups
over 19 years old compared to 2000. The CED prevalence in adults less than 25 years old and
over 55 years old were higher than other age groups. This was also observed by other studies
elsewhere [5,9,21].
Analyzing by sex found similar results (the data were re-analyzed by the same methodology
and statistic software).
Figure 4.40. Prevalence of CED in male in 2000 and 2010
58
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.41. Prevalence of CED in female in 2000 and 2010
4.1.2. Overweight and obesity
Overweight and obesity are defined as abnormal or excessive fat accumulation in parts
or whole body that may impair health (WHO).
In this modern and dynamic world, overweight/obesity becomes more popular and is
on the rise in the population. It is a serious problem in developed countries and a rapidly
emerging problem in developing countries.
Overweight defined by BMI (BMI from 25 kg/m2 to 29.9 kg/m2) and obesity (BMI over 30
kg/m2) are presented in Appendix B (table B49, B50). The prevalence of overweight and obesity
in adults over 20 years old was 5.6% (CI95%: 4.99-6.37). In males, it was 4.9% (CI95%: 4.25-5.73)
and in females, it was 6.3% (CI95%: 5.45-7.25). In Vietnam, overweight/obesity was highest
for adults 55-59 years old, in males 7.8% and in females 10.9%. The prevalence was higher in
females compared to males, thus not significantly.
Figure 4.42. Prevalence overweight and obesity in general in 2000 and 2010 surveys
59
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.43. Prevalence overweight and obesity in male in 2000 and 2010 surveys
Figure 4.44. Prevalence overweight and obesity in female in 2000 and 2010 surveys
By ecological regions, the prevalence of overweight/obesity was highest in the Southeast
(including Hochiminh city). In total, the prevalence was 10.7% (CI95%: 7.95-14.17), in males
9.1% (CI95%: 6.22-13.26) and in females 11.9% (CI95%: 8.47-16.58) (table B50, Appendix).
The prevalence of overweight/obesity is significantly different between urban and rural
areas, for both total prevalence and prevalence by sex. The prevalence of overweight/obesity
in both sexes in urban areas was 13.1% (CI95%: 10.8-15.9), and in the rural areas was 6%
(CI95%: 5.35-6.78). For males, it was 12.4% (CI95%: 9,66-15,83) in the urban and 5.4% (CI95%:
4.61-6.26) in the rural. For females, it was 13.8% (CI95%: 11.24-16.78) in the urban and 6.6%
(CI95%: 5.6-7.6) in the rural.
60
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
By wealth index, the prevalence of overweight and obesity is significantly different
among rich, marginal rich, middle, marginal poor and poor households. (Appendix, Table B54).
By maternal education, there is no clear pattern for the difference of the prevalence
among different educational levels (Appendix, table B53).
PART D
Figure 4.45. Prevalence of overweight and obesity in female by region
5. Height growth in Vietnamese people
5.1. Height growth in children under five years
Growth in children was assessed by measuring the child’s weight for length or height
and comparing these values with the growth standard according to age. The aim of the
assessment was to determine whether growth in children was "normal" or if there are potential problems or trends that would require intervention [10]. Following analysis of the data
interventions can be more accurately aimed at the causes of undernutrition. After nutrition
assessment, if the target groups do not receive the appropriate interventions, then an
opportunity to improve health and nutrition status in children may be lost, with long-term
implications for health and growth stature in adulthood.
Table 4.3. Mean height in children 1-5 years by age and gender
1985
n
Mean ± б
2000
n
2010
Mean ± б
n
Change
Change
between
1985-2010 2000-2010
WHO 2005 between
Mean ± б
1 year old (12 months)
Boys
64
70.9 ± 6.0 156
73.0 ± 3.9
165
74.5 ± 4.2 75.7 ± 2.37
3.6
1.5
Girls
66
68.8 ± 4.1 146
71.9 ± 3.9
167
73.2 ± 4.3 74.0 ± 2.5
4.4
1.3
2 year old (24 months)
Boys
215 77.7 ± 4.2 167
81.9 ± 4.5
172
83.9 ± 4.1 87.8 ± 3.1
6.2
2
Girls
231 77.6 ± 4.1 158
80.6 ± 4.6
169
82.5 ± 4.6 86.4 ± 3.2
4.9
1.9
61
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1985
n
Mean ± б
2000
n
2010
Mean ± б
n
Change
Change
between
1985-2010 2000-2010
WHO 2005 between
Mean ± б
3 year old (36 months)
Boys
622 86.6 ± 6.1 162
89.4 ± 4.8
184
91.9 ± 4.3 96.0 ± 3.7
5.3
2.8
Girls
559 84.8 ± 5.9 159
88.1 ± 4.8
186
91.0 ± 4.5 95.1 ± 3.8
6.2
1.5
4 year old (48 months)
Boys
600 92.2 ± 8.5 161
96.2 ± 5.0
171
99.0 ± 4.7 103.3 ± 4.2
6.8
2.8
Girls
650 91.9 ± 7.7 165
95.5 ± 5.2
175
97.9 ± 4.6 102.7 ± 4.3
6
2.4
Boys
539 97.6 ± 7.2 146 100.6 ± 6.6 169 103.6± 4.9 109.9 ± 4.6
6
3.0
Girls
445 97.3 ± 5.7 172
5.6
3.3
PART D
5 year old (60 months)
99.6 ± 5.4
174 102.9 ± 4.8 109.4 ± 4.8
Table 4.3. shows the trends of linear growth in children under 5 years through the data
of the General Nutrition Surveys. These trends could be attributed to increased living standards, improved nutrition and health which occurred in Viet Nam in the past decades during
times of economic growth. For example, a 2-year-old boy in 1985 had an average height of
77.7 cm, but by 2010 the average rose to 83.9 cm, an increase of 6.2 cm in 25 years.
Growth in children is affected by many factors, namely internal genetic factors and
environmental conditions. Of the external factors, nutrition plays a crucial role. Children under
2 years of age undergo an important period of physical and mental development and are at
high risk for developing nutritional deficiencies. Many studies show that in developing countries, including Vietnam, the period in which young children have the highest risk for malnutrition is from 12 to 24 months of age and that the high prevalence of malnutrition at 60
months old is actually an accumulated rate.
Figure 4.46. Trends of mean height in boys and girls from the General Surveys between 1985-2010
62
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
There have been significant achievements made in reducing the prevalence of undernutrition, vitamin A deficiency, iron deficiency anaemia, and especially in stunting with the
improvement of nutrition for mothers and children, whereas height accelerations in children
have responded to a lesser degree.
Using data from SEAMIC, the linear growth rate of Vietnamese children compared with
those in the region [32], data are presented in Table 4.4 below.
Table 4.4. The mean height of children (1-5 years) by age according
to the current available data
Country
Scope
Year
Nationwide 2006
Indonesia
Nationwide 2007
Japan
Nationwide 2008
Malaysia
Nationwide
Philippines Nationwide 2007
Singapore
Nationwide 2004
Thailand
Nationwide 2004
Vietnam
Nationwide 2009
1
2
3
4
5
Boys
81.9 (5.3)
91.4 (4.6)
99.3 (4.8) 106.6 (3.3) 112.7 (5.4)
Girls
77.2 (13)
91.4 (4.6)
99.1 (7.0) 106.3 (4.9) 116.2 (5.5)
Boys
98.9 (4.5) 103.1 (4.6)
Girls
97.6 (4.7) 102.7 (4.3)
Boys
80.8 (4.5)
85.1 (4.7)
92.8 (4.9)
99.8 (5.0) 104.4 (5.1)
Girls
78.9 (4.4)
84.3 (4.7)
91.9 (5.1)
98.5 (5.0) 104.1 (5.1)
Boys
No data
Girls
No data
Boys
77.3 (4.3)
85.1 (4.7)
92.0 (4.9)
98.0 (5.0) 103.8 (5.1)
Girls
75.9 (4.5)
84.3 (4.7)
91.1 (5.1)
97.2 (5.0) 103.1 (5.1)
Boys
99.6 (4.9) 105.7 (3.6) 110.3 (5.2)
Girls
99.5 (5.3) 104.6 (4.2) 109.4 (5.6)
Boys
74.8
87.0
95.0
102.0
112.8
Girls
73.4
84.7
94.1
101.1
107.6
Boys
74.5 (4.2)
83.9 (4.1)
91.9 (4.3)
99.0 (4.7) 103.6 (4.9)
Girls
73.2 (4.3)
82.5 (4.6)
91.0 (4.5)
97.9 (4.6) 102.9 (4.8)
Source: 1. Southeast Asian Medical Information Center International Medical Foundation of Japan.
2. National Nutrition Survey, Health Service Bureau, Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare.
Note : (n) represents Standard deviation.
63
PART D
Brunei
Age in years
Sex
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Figure 4.47. Mean height of boys and girls by nationality
5.2. Trends of anthropometry among children 6-14 years
5.2.1. Trend of mean height
Table 4.5. compares the trend in the mean height of children from 6-14 years of age in
rural areas, from 1975 to 2009 with those in urban areas between 1994 and 2009. This data
is based on the trends in mean height by age which was reported in the Vietnam General
Nutrition Survey in 2000.
In both urban and rural areas, there was an overall trend of increase in the mean height
for both girls and boys. The mean height amongst rural children did not differ from 1975
to1985, and in some age groups, the mean height values were actually lower in 1985.
Between 1985 and 2009, however, there was a progressive increase in the mean height. For
example, among 11 year old rural boys, it increased by 8.3 cm, and among 11 year old rural
girls by 11.2 cm. There was a similar pattern of increase in the mean height of urban children
from 1994 to 2009.
Based on available data from three different surveys, the mean height of urban children
was higher than those in rural areas.
64
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
5.2.2. Trend of mean weight
Table 4.5. Trends of linear growth from 1975 to 2009
(*) BCV: Biological Constant of the Vietnamese
Rural
Sex
Females
Urban
BCV (*)
(1975)
NIN
(1985)
NIN
(2000)
NIN
(2009)
NIN
(2000)
NIN
(2009)
6
106.5
103.6
109.3
109.8
113.1
110.3
7
110.9
109.3
115.0
118.1
118.7
118.4
8
116.1
113.3
119.4
123.1
122.9
125.1
9
118.8
118.2
124.0
126.6
126.5
129.1
10
121.5
122.1
128.4
130.6
132.4
134.0
11
126.9
126.0
132.4
134.3
135.9
138.5
12
130.9
129.9
136.9
139.7
142.3
139.8
13
133.9
133.6
141.1
145.1
145.7
146.6
14
137.6
137.0
148.6
151.5
154.0
155.1
6
104.8
102.1
108.4
109.5
118.8
115.9
7
110.2
108.0
114.0
116.6
118.7
121.4
8
115.5
112.8
119.3
122.2
122.4
123.7
9
117.4
117.6
123.6
126.0
127.6
131.0
10
122.1
121.5
129.0
132.3
133.3
135.7
11
126.3
125.6
134.2
136.8
139.6
145.9
12
130.5
129.8
138.6
141.9
142.7
145.3
13
135.0
134.5
143.4
145.7
145.2
147.7
14
138.9
138.5
147.0
150.0
149.3
150.1
PART D
Males
Age
(year)
The trends in mean weight of rural children 6-14 years old in Vietnam from 1975 to 2009
and of urban children from 1994 to 2009 are also evident. The mean weights of children in
this age group were based on the earlier reported trends from the Vietnam General Nutrition
Survey in 2000.
In both urban and rural areas there was an overall trend of increase in mean weight for
both girls and boys. The mean weight in rural children between 1975 and 1985 remained
unchanged, and in some age groups, the mean weight values were actually lower in 1985.
But between 1985 and 2009, there was a progressive increase in the mean weight, for example, for boys at the age of 11 years, the mean weight increased by 5.6 kg and by 6.7 kg in girls.
There was a similar increase observed in the mean weight values for children from urban
populations from 1994 to 2009.
Based on comparisons of data from three different surveys, the mean weight values of
children living in urban areas ended to be higher than those of rural children, with increased
disparity noted in each successive survey, especially for boys.
65
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
5.3. Height in adults
Data support a trend of increased height amongst Vietnamese people since the end of
the war in 1975. Results from the General Nutrition Survey in 2009-2010 showed that the
height previously achieved between 20-24 years of age in both young men and women is
now being reached at a much earlier age (in 2000, the peak height gain occured between 2629 years of age) (Appendix B- table B58).
PART D
Table 4.6. shows that the mean height of men in Vietnam between 20-24 years in 2009
was 164.4 cm (± 0.53) and for women of the same age was 153.4 cm (± 0.73). The mean height
values of adults in urban areas generally higher than those in rural areas, as well as those
from households with higher living conditions.
66
> 70
65-69
60-64
55-59
50-54
45-49
40-44
35-39
30-34
24-29
20-24
age
Characteristics
164.44
163.91; 164.97
164.32
163.78; 164.87
163.59
163.11; 164.07
163.59
163.22; 163.97
163.31
162.74; 163.88
163.50
163.07; 163.94
162.93
162.43; 163.44
162.16
161.19; 163.13
161.21
160.52; 161.91
160.46
159.55; 161.38
158.30
157.57; 159.03
[95% CI]
Mean
1433
1007
1440
1528
1229
1163
822
648
390
244
661
6.46
5.87
5.73
5.93
5.74
5.78
5.88
5.81
6.09
6.80
n
5.96
SD
Male
153.42
152.69; 154.15
153.34
152.65; 154.04
152.66
151.72; 153.59
154.34
153.94; 154.74
153.68
153.1; 154.26
153.32
152.63; 154.02
153.57
152.71; 154.44
152.95
152.14; 153.77
151.27
150.39; 152.15
149.90
148.69; 151.11
146.10
144.3; 147.91
[95% CI]
Mean
7.32
6.71
5.46
5.67
4.97
5.61
5.69
5.19
5.53
5.55
5.32
SD
Female
819
286
458
669
915
1219
1203
1463
1502
1211
1685
n
PART D
Height
158.99
158.49; 159.5
158.74
158.26; 159.21
158.51
158.15; 158.87
159.08
158.72; 159.44
158.64
158.24; 159.04
158.52
158.15; 158.88
158.24
157.81; 158.66
157.62
156.92; 158.32
155.84
155.13; 156.56
155.01
154.09; 155.94
152.70
152.09; 153.3
[95% CI]
Mean
Table 4.6. Mean height of adults >=20 years by sex and age group,
The Vietnam 2009 General Nutrition Survey
8.64
8.14
7.31
7.22
6.95
7.49
7.55
7.16
7.57
7.95
7.53
SD
Total
1479
530
848
1317
1737
2381
2432
2992
2942
2218
3118
Total
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
67
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.7. Mean height of adults by nationality
Mean height
of male
Mean height
of female
Age
Year
Australia
1.814 m (5 ft 10 in)
1.695 m (5 ft 5 in)
18–24
2002
China
1.702 m (5 ft 7 in)
1.586 m (5 ft 2 ½ in)
17-20
2004
India
1.73 m (5 ft 8 in)
1.650 m (5 ft 5 in)
20
2005–2006
Indonesia
1.644 m (5 ft 5 in)
1.55 m (4 ft 11 ½ in)
23-29
2008
Japan
1.715 m (5 ft 7 ½ in)
1.580 m (5 ft 2 in)
19
2006
Malaysia
1.684 m (5 ft 6 ½ in)
1.577 m (5 ft 2 in)
25–34
2008
Norway
1.820 m (5 ft 11 ½ in)
1.690 m (5 ft 6 ½ in)
20-29
2010
Philippines
1.649 m (5 ft 5 ½ in)
1.55 6 m (4 ft 11 in)
20+
2005
Singapore
1.706 m (5 ft 7 in)
1.600 m (5 ft 3 in)
17–25
2003
1.739 m (5 ft 8 ½ in)
1.611 m (5 ft 3 ½ in)
19
2006
1.675 m (5 ft 6 in)
1.573 m (5 ft 2 in)
20+
1991–1995
White American
1.789 m (5 ft 10 ½ in)
1.648 m (5 ft 5 in)
20–39
2003–2006
Black American
1.780 m (5 ft 10 in)
1.632 m (5 ft 4 ½ in)
20–39
2003–2006
Vietnam
1.644 m (5 ft 5 in)
1.548 m (5 ft 1 ½ in)
22-26
2009
PART D
Country/Territory
Korea
Thailand
III. NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF MOTHERS WITH CHILDREN UNDER 5 YEARS
In recent years, Vietnam has made great achievements in the process of reducing child
malnutrition. In addition to interventions aimed at children, the nutritional status of mothers
play a key role in determining socioeconomic factors which influence the development of
children.
To reduce the prevalence of undernutrition, especially stunting in children, interventions
must be focused on women throughout pregnancy through the first two years of the child’s
life. Deficiencies during this critical period are related to serious, irreversible damage; therefore, nutrition interventions have the greatest impact and economic effectiveness for children’s health, social, and economic development.
The World Health Organization has warned that maternal undernutrition, a very common
situation in many developing countries, leads to the poor fetal growth and increased risk for
complications during pregnancy. Globally, approximately 13 million babies each year were
low birth weight or premature. Malnutrition in mothers and children accounted for more
than 10% of global disease burden.
68
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The National Nutrition Strategy for 2001-2010 included interventions for women from
pre-pregnancy through birth and lactation, with a focus on pregnancy, multi-micronutrient
supplementation, nutrition education for breastfeeding mothers, and appropriate weaning
food for children.
Figure 4.48. shows that the prevalence of chronic energy deficiency (CED) in mothers
with children under 5 years old was 20.2% (95% CI 19.7%, 20.6%) in 2010. It is noted that the
prevalence of CED in mothers was highest in young mothers aged 15-19 (23.5%), followed
by mothers between 20-29 years (23.3%). In the mountainous and remote areas, child
marriage is still a common practice, which when combined with poor nutritional status of
mothers, leads to increased risk of poor nutritional status and health of the newborn.
Figure 4.48. Prevalence of CED among mothers with children under 5 years old between 2000 and 2010
Figure 4.49. Prevalence of overweight and obesity among mothers with
children under 5 years of age between 2000 and 2010
69
PART D
It is clear that the prevalence of CED among mothers has decreased from 2000 to 2010,
however the rate of decline is slow. In the past of 10 years, there was only a 6.5% reduction
in prevalence of CED in mothers, with an average reduction of 0.65% per year.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Meanwhile, the trend of increased prevalence of overweight and obesity in mothers with
children under 5 years old is quite clearly observed (Figure 4.49).
In summary, it is essential to continue the high priority of focus to maternal nutrition
interventions. With a rate of one fifth of mothers who are underweight (CED) at present,
further aims to decrease prevalence of newborns with low birth weight and undernutrition
to low levels of public health significance will remain a major challenge in the next decade.
IV. MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES AND BREASTFEEDING PRACTICES
PART D
1. Micronutrient deficiencies
Micronutrient deficiencies (vitamin A, iron, zinc) remain significant public health problems
in many countries around the world, including Vietnam. Children and women of childbearing
age are particularly at high risk for these deficiencies [15.22]. In children, vitamin A deficiency
and anaemia have significant consequences such as impaired development of height and
weight, malnutrition, reduced immunity, and increased susceptibility to infections which can
cause learning delays due to higher absence from school. As adults, decreased learning and
higher rate of health problems can lead to decreased labour productivity for individuals and
the society [15].
In recent decades, Vietnam, with efforts from government agencies, along with international organisations, and Protein Energy Malnutrition Control Programs, have made remarkable achievements. The prevalence of vitamin A deficiency and anaemia have shown slight
reductions but still remain significant public health issues. When entering an updated
National Nutrition Strategy, investigation to determine appropriate interventions and
approaches for each region in the coming period is essential. [21.22].
1.1. Anaemia and vitamin A deficiency by ecological region
Table 4.8. Prevalence of anaemia and vitamin A deficiency
in children by ecological region
Total
Anemia (%)
Vitamin A deficiency (%)
(retinol <0,7 mmol/L)
Region 1: Red River Delta
1202
23.5b
9.1a
Region 2: Northeast
1580
34.0b
13.0b
Region 3: Northwest
600
43.0c
19.4b
Region 4: North Central region
539
26.3b
16.4b
Region 5: Central Coast
599
33.1b
15.2b
Region 6: Central Highland Land
545
26.4b
20.9c
Region 7: Southeast
1538
22.8b
10.3b
Region 8: Mekong River Delta
1569
30.3b
17.0b
Nationwide
8152
29.2b
14.2b
Note: a, Mild level; b, Moderate level; c, severe level of public health significance
70
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.7. shows that the overall prevalence of anaemia and pre-clinical vitamin A
deficiency nationwide, was 29.2% and 14.2%, respectively. Both indicate an average level of
public health significance.
The data for each region revealed that the prevalence of vitamin A deficiency among
children in the Red River Delta was at mild level of public health significance (9.1%). The prevalence of vitamin A deficiency among children in the Highland region was at severe level
(20.9%).
1.2. Prevalence of anaemia and vitamin A deficiency by age group
Figure 4.50. Prevalence of vitamin A deficiency and anaemia in children under 5 by age group in 2008
As seen in Figure 4.50., the prevalence of anaemia was highest in children between 0 to
23 months old (44-45%). The percentage of anaemia decreases significantly with age, with
the lowest prevalence found in children between 48-59 months at 14.2%.
Similarly, the prevalence of vitamin A deficiency was greatest in children less than 12
months old and is considered a severe level of public health significance. The prevalence in
children 24-36 months was reduced to a mild level, followed by a gradual increase from
36-59 months representing an average level of public health significance.
These results show that children remain significantly deficient in vitamin A with the prevalence of 29% among infants less than 12 months, and anaemia even more significantly
observed at 45% in children less than 24 months. These results are consistent with previous
71
PART D
The prevalence of anaemia was highest among children in the Northwest at 43%,
compared amongst all ecological regions of the country, and is considered a severe level of
public health significance. The prevalence of anaemia and vitamin A deficiency among
children in the remaining ecological regions were all ranked at a moderate level of public
health significance.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
studies [14,16,31], and micronutrient deficiencies at this age, place these young children at
the highest risk for further undernutrition.
PART D
2. Situation of Breastfeeding
Breast milk most adequately meets the nutritional needs for growth and development
in children, especially during the first 6 months of life when the digestive tract continues to
develop. Since the nutrient components of breast milk are most easily digested and
absorbed, the burden on the digestive tract and excretion function of the kidneys are minimised, the growth process is enabled, and development of the brain, retina, blood vessels
are improved. Furthermore, breastfeeding can prevent undernutrition, prevent micronutrient
deficiencies, and protect the child against oxidation. Exclusive breast feeding up to six months
also helps to prevent overweight and obesity in children. Many studies domesticly and globally, have proved breastfeeding not only beneficial to the child's health but also
provides health protection for mothers in both immediate and long-term.
The survey revealed that the prevalence of exclusive breastfeeding until 6 months of age
was very low, with up to 34.6% of children under 2 years old receiving bottle feeding.
Table 4.9. Child feeding practices
Indicators
Prevalence (%)
Initiation of breastfeeding within 1 hour
76.2
Colostrum breastfeeding
70.8
Exclusive breastfeeding until 4 months
25.8
Exclusive breastfeeding until 6 months
19.6
Breastfeed weaning
< 12 months
6.6
12 months
14.4
13-24 months
67.0
>24 months
11.9
Bottle feeding in children <24 months
72
34.6
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
3. Coverage of high dose vitamin A capsule supplementation in children and lactating
women after delivery
Table 4.10. Prevalence of coverage of vitamin A supplements
Ecological regions
Prevalence of mother taken
Prevalence of children taken
vitamin A supplementation
vitamin A supplementation (%)
after delivery (%)
83.0
73.5
Northeast
89.5
61.8
Northwest
94.6
75.2
North Central
88.8
79.2
Central Coast
88.1
69.0
Central High Land
85.4
55.3
Southeast
87.2
60.7
Mekong River Delta
84.3
57.9
Nationwide
87.0
65.2
PART D
Red River Delta
Coverage of high dose vitamin A supplementation in children and lactating women varies
greatly by region. Among children, the lowest coverage was found in the Red River Delta
(83%) and Mekong River Delta (84.3%). The highest coverage for children was in the North
West area with 94.6% receiving the supplement.
Coverage of high dose vitamin A supplementation in lactating women was found at a
much lower rate, with the lowest level in the Central Highlands (55.3%) and Mekong River
Delta (57.9%) and the highest level in the North Central region (79.2%).
The national average indicated that about 87% of children in Viet Nam received vitamin
A supplementation, whilst only 65.2% of women received the supplement following
delivery.
V. FOOD CONSUMPTION
Staple food is defined as that which provides the most essential requirements for humans
and the most basic elements for comprehensive development,which also ensures sustainable
social development. Identifying the root cause of eating problems at the household level is
a key component in the strategy to ensure food and nutrition security [13.21].
73
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Individual food consumption is closely associated with the production, processing, and
distribution of food, as well as the habits, education, and technological achievements of the
nation. This is further adapted and adjusted according to socio-economic conditions. In the
past 25 years, there have been significant improvements in the dietary intake of Vietnamese
people, largely attributed to remarkable changes in socio-economic status and significant
economic growth. During this period, the GDP per capita increased 5 times, from US$ 239.3
/person/year in 1985 to US $ 1198 person/year in 2010. In addition, the process of international integration has also affected the diet.
PART D
Through analysis of specific changes that have occurred in the dietary intake of people
in Viet Nam, more appropriate guidelines can be established to encourage adequate nutrition
in the population.
A systematic method for monitoring food consumption amongt all Vietnamese people
is essential in the development of the overall plan to ensure adequacy of food production,
distribution, import, and export as well as ensure all people are consuming a balanced diet,
meeting all nutrient needs.
Prior to 1980, there had been small scale surveys on food consumption in people by
various occupations. The General Survey on Household Food Consumption was first
conducted from 1981-1985 and was followed by The General Survey on Food Consumption
and Nutritional Problems of the People in 1989, 2000 and most recently, this fourth General
Nutrition Survey, conducted from 2009-2010.
The overall findings on food consumption are presented in detail in Appendix F and in
tables F1 to F28, reporting on the dietary intake of households nationwide with further
classification by rural and urban distinction, and by ecological region of the country.
1. Overall findings
1.1. Household food consumption in 2009-2010
a) Rice and other staple foods: The first General Survey concluded that dietary intake was
synonymous with rice, which was the staple food. Diets at that time were generally
deficient in quantity and there also existed an imbalance in quality [5.17]. The finding of
rice as the dietary staple was reasserted in the General Nutrition Survey in 2000, "Rice was
[the] main food with mean consumption at 397.3gr/capita/day nationwide". In 2000, rice
consumption was the highest in the Central Highlands and Northwest (432.6 and
427.6gr/capita/day, respectively). Among people living in the deltas, namely the Red River
Delta and Mekong River Delta, rice consumption was also found at high levels (404.7 and
414.7gr/capita/day, respectively)[1].
The 2010 survey showed that mean rice consumption was 373.2gr/capita/day nationwide,
with 330.3gr/capita/day among urban Vietnamese, and 388.3gr/capita/day amongst rural
(Appendix F, Table F8 and F9). Mean consumption of rice in the Red River Delta was
369.1gr/capita/day and in the Mekong River Delta it was 365.3gr/capita/day (Appendix F,
Table F2 and F7). From 1980 to date, the daily consumption of rice decreased over time in
both urban and rural areas, however, from 2000 and 2010, the reduction of rice consumption per capita in both urban and rural areas was not statistically significant.
74
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The 2010 survey showed the consumption of wheat and wheat products was 26.2gr/
capita/ day (95% CI 22.8gr, 29.5g) in urban areas, significantly higher than that of the rural
areas (13.1gr/capita/day; 95% CI 11.8g, 14.3gr). The consumption of other cereals
excluding rice and wheat among urban inhabitants (26.9gr/ capita/ day; 95% CI 23.6gr,
30.2gr) was also significantly higher than that of the rural areas (13.5gr/ capita/ day; 95%
CI 12.3gr, 14.6gr).
Tubers were consumed at 4.1gr/capita/day nationwide, with the lowest levels found in
the Central Highlands and South East (2.1 and 2.8gr/capita/day, respectively), and the
highest level in the Mekong River Delta (6.3gr/capita/day). Consumption of tubers in the
Vietnam General Nutrition Survey in 2000 was reported at 8.9gr/capita/day, much higher
than current data.
Fish: Consumption of fish increased in this period, although to a lesser degree than meat.
Daily fish consumption was 59.8gr/capita/day nationwide. The highest level of fish
consumption was found in the Mekong River Delta at 78.9gr/capita/day, followed by the
North Central and Central Coastal areas with 78.6gr/capita/day. The lowest level of fish
consumption was in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas (29.8gr/capita/day), the
Red River Delta (42.0gr/capita/day) and the Central Highlands (46.0gr/capita/day).
Eggs: The egg consumption was highest in the Red River Delta (18.6gr/capita/day) and the
South East (15.2gr/capita/day), which was higher than the mean consumption
nationwide. Egg consumption was lowest in the Mekong River Delta (8.6gr/capita/day),
Central Highlands (9.7gr/capita/day), and North Central and Central Coastal areas
(10.9gr/capita/day), which was found to be lower than the mean consumption nationwide.
Milk powder and cheese: The highest powdered milk and cheese consumption was in the
South East at (7.0gr/capita/day), the Mekong River Delta (3.3gr/capita/day), followed by
the Red River Delta (2.2gr/capita/day). The lowest consumption was observed in the
Northern Midland and Mountain areas at (0.6gr/capita/day), the Central Highlands (1.1gr/
capita/ day), and the North Central and Central Coastal areas (1.4gr/capita/day).
Fluid milk consumption: the highest consumption of fluid milk was found in the South
East areas (37.0gr/capita/day), the Red River Delta (15.5gr/capita/day), and the North
Central and Central Coastal areas (12.7gr/capita/day). The lowest intake was in the
Northern Midland and Mountain areas (9.1gr/capita/day), the Central Highlands (10.8gr/
capita/ day), and the Mekong River Delta (11.4gr/capita/day).
c) Consumption of vegetables and fruit:
75
PART D
b) Consumption of animal-based foods: The survey indicated that the main sources of
animal foods consumed were meats and fish. Meat consumption was 84gr/capita/day
(95% CI 80.0gr, 87.9gr) nationwide. The Red River Delta and the South East regions have
the highest level of meat consumption (108.3gr/capita/day and 104gr/capita/day, respectively), compared to other regions. Meat consumption was lowest in the North Central
and Central Coastal areas (56.7gr/ capita/ day) and the Mekong River Delta (65.9gr/ capita/
day).
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Leafy vegetables and edible flowers: The highest consumption was obersved in the
Northern Midland and Mountain areas (208.6gr/ capita/ day), the Red River Delta (176.3gr/
capita/ day) and the South East (168.4gr/ capita/ day), which was higher than the mean
consumption nationwide. The lowest consumption was seen in the Mekong River Delta
(116.4gr/ capita/ day), the North Central and Central Coastal areas (139.3gr/ capita/ day),
and in the Central Highlands (141.2gr/ capita/ day), which were lower than the mean
consumption nationwide.
PART D
Tuberous vegetables: The highest intake of the root vegetables was in the Mekong River
Delta (47.7gr/ capita/ day) and South East areas (36.6gr/ capita/ day), which were higher
than the mean consumption nationwide. Consumption was lowest in the North Central
and Central Coastal areas (23.7gr/ capita/ day), followed by the Red River Delta (27.9gr/
capita/ day) and the Central Highlands (29.8gr/ capita/ day), which were lower than mean
consumption nationwide.
Ripe fruits: The highest consumption of ripe fruits was observed in the South East (98.9gr/
capita/ day) and the Red River Delta (84.0gr/ capita/ day), which both had intakes higher
than the mean consumption nationwide. The lowest consumption was found in the
Central Highlands (21.5gr/ capita/ day), the Northern Midland and Mountain areas (36.2gr/
capita/ day), followed by the North Central and Central Coastal areas (40.6gr/ capita/ day),
which showed intakes lower than the mean consumption nationwide.
(More details of the food consumption can be found in Appendix F).
1.2. Comparison of the food intake in the Vietnam 2009 General Nutrition Survey with the
Recommendations of the National Institute of Nutrition (NIN) 2001-2010 in the
Balanced Nutrition Pyramid.
Human nutritional needs vary based on age, sex, physiological status, and energy
exertion, therefore, nutrient requirements also vary according to the individual. The goals
set out by the National Nutrition Strategy 2001-2010 are compared with the average intakes
observed in the 2010 survey:
a. Food stuff: Based on the recommended level of total consumption of 10 kg/ capita/
month-with an average of 330 g/capita/day, the mean consumption nationwide
currently exceeds the recommendation at 117%. In terms of consumption by the
ecological region, the staple food consumption met 99.8% (in the South East), 114% in
the Red River Delta, 115% in the Mekong River Delta, 123% in the North Central and
Central Coastal areas, and 125% the Northern Midland and Mountain areas. The highest
level of consumption was observed in the Central Highlands with 134% of total intake
suggested by the National Institute of Nutrition Recommendations.
b. Vegetables: The current mean intake of vegetables only met 57% of the recommended
level, according to the NIN guidelines in the Balanced Nutrition Pyramid. The intake of
vegetables most closely met the Recommendation in the Northern Midland and Mountain
areas (72%), followed by the Red River Delta and South East (61%), and Central Highland
areas (53%). The regions with the lowest daily consumption of vegetables were the Mekong
River Delta and the North Central area, meeting only 49% of the recommendation.
76
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
c. Ripe fruit: According to the NIN’s current recommendations, people are advised to
consume ripe fruit liberally. The survey found an average of 61.9gr/capita/day, nationwide.
The area with highest ripe fruit consumption was the South East with 99gr/ capita/ day and
the lowest consumption was in the Central Highlands with only 21.5gr/ capita/ day.
d. Meat: The current guidelines suggest an average meat consumption of 1.5kg/month, or
about 50gr/capita/day. The highest meat consumption was observed in the Red River
Delta with a mean consumption of 106gr/capita/day (216% of the NIN’s Recommended
intake), the lowest consumption was found in the North Central area with 56.7gr/ capita/
day- still 13% higher than the recommendation.
f.
Tofu: The current NIN recommendation for tofu is 2kg/capita/month. The survey showed
a national mean intake of 18.9gr/capita/day, meeting only 28% of suggested intake. The
areas with the highest consumption of tofu were the Northern Midland and Mountain
areas with 37.7gr/ capita/ day, still only meeting 55% of the recommended intake.
Consumption of tofu was found at the lowest level in the Mekong River Delta (5.7gr/
capita/ day), meeting a meager 7.5% of the recommendation.
g. Oil and seeds (sesame, groundnut): The survey revealed that the national mean
consumption remained low at 2.37gr/capita/day.
1.3. Nutritive values in the dietary intake
The nationwide survey of dietary composition revealed that:
•
Mean energy intake per capita was 1925.4 kcal/day. The mean total protein consumption
was 74.3gr/capita/day, which varied from 68.9gr/capita/day in the Central Highlands to
80.1gr/capita/day in the South East.
•
Vitamins and minerals:
Based on the values of the total amount of carotenoids in fruits and vegetables, the
current typical diet of adults in Viet Nam is adequate to meet the NIN’s Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for vitamin A. The mean carotene intake was 6
mg/capita/day, double the level observed in the Vietnam General Nutrition Survey
conducted 10 years ago. Vitamin A from animal sources provided an average of 0.15
mg/capita/day, meeting only 28.7% of the RDA. Consumption of vitamin A from animal sources amongst urban populations was 0.17 mg/capita/day (32% of RDA) and
amongst people in rural areas it was 0.14 mg/capita/day (26% of RDA).
77
PART D
e. Fish and seafood: The recommendation for fish and seafood suggests that people
should consume about 2.5kg/capita/month (83gr/capita/day). Nationally, the current
level of consumption was estimated at 69.4gr/capita/day, meeting 83% of the NIN’s
recommendation. Intake of fish and seafood was highest in the Mekong River Delta with
90.7gr/ capita/ day, followed by the North Central and Central Coastal areas with 86.1gr/
capita/ day, and the South East areas with 80.2gr/ capita/ day. The lowest consumption
was observed in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas at 33gr/capita/day, reaching
only 39% of the NIN’s recommendation. In general, there is a trend of higher consumption
of fish and seafood amongst inhabitants in the Southern and Central areas compared
with Northern.
PART D
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Vitamin B1: The ratio of vitamin B1 per 1000 kcal energy intake met the 2007 NIN’s
recommended requirements (0.5 to 0.8 mg). Currently, an average of 1.1 mg/ capita/
day of vitamin B1 was observed nationwide.
Vitamin C intake was 85.1mg/capita/day, mainly derived from fresh vegetables and
fruits. If applying the standard rate of loss of 50% during food processing and storage,
the actual dietary vitamin C did not meet the NIN’s recommended requirement of
70 mg/capita/day.
Data from the 2010 survey reveal that dietary iron intakes reached 12.3 mg/ capita/
day. Typically, iron in the Vietnamese diet has an average bio-availability. The actual
rate of iron absorption ranged between 5-10% of dietary intakes. Based on the
limited amount of iron absorbed related to total consumption, it is unlikely that
adolescents and women are meeting the recommendation.
The Ca/P ratio ranged from 0.55 to 0.8 in different ecological regions.
1.4. Trends in food consumption
1.4.1. Total daily food consumption
Figure 4.51. shows the total food intake per capita per day, calculated from household
food intake surveys for individuals. Excluding all sauces and beverages, mean consumption
was 782.2gr in 1985, 765.3gr between 1989-1990, 815.3gr in 2000, and 877.2gr in 2009-2010.
The General Nutrition Survey in 1989-1990 showed that although the amount of total food
consumption was slightly lower, there was actually not much fluctuation and the difference
in total food intake was not statistically significant. It is notable that the primary change is
the increased contribution from animal sources in total energy consumption. The percentage
of food intake from animal sources was 12% in 1985, 10% in 1990, 15% in 2000, and 21% in
2010 (Figure 4.52). These changes further contributed to a change in dietary composition
which will be discussed in the following section.
Figure 4.51. Mean food consumption in the Vietnam General Nutrition Surveys, NIN
78
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.52. Changes in the ratio of animal food to total food intake
1.4.2. Trends in food consumption
Figure 4.53. Trends in food consumption
Table 4.11. Changes in food consumption in the General Nutrition Surveys
1981-85
1987-89
2000
2010
Rice (gr)
458
452
397
373.2
Oils, fats (gr)
1.6
3
6.8
8
Vegetables
214
171.3 ± 34.8
178.6 ± 112.8
190.4 ± 126.2
79
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
In addition to a gradual increase in total energy consumption, dietary composition has
also changed. Between 1985 and 2010, meat and poultry intake increased nearly eight-fold.
The mean intake per capita per day of meat and poultry was only 11.1gr in 1985, and
increased to 24.4gr in 1989, 51gr in 2000, and 84gr by 2010.
•
Oil and fat consumption per capita per day increased 500 per cent over 25 years, from
1.6gr in 1985, to 3gr in 1989, 6.8gr in 2000 and to 8gr in 2010.
•
Intake of ripe fruit per capita per day increased from 2.2gr in 1985 to 4.1gr in 1989, 62.4gr
in 2000, and 60.9gr in 2010.
•
The daily fish intake per capita per day among Vietnamese people increased from 35gr
in 1985 to 41.2gr in 1989, 45.5gr in 2000 and 59.8gr in 2010.
•
The amount of egg and milk consumption increased from 0.8gr/capita/day in 1985, to
2.9gr in 1989, 10.3gr in 2000, and 29.5gr in 2010. Despite the rapid increase in milk
consumption in recent years, in general, milk consumption among Vietnamese people
remains low due to limited production, storage and processing in Viet Nam, and irregular
availablity of imported products. In addition, high quality are consumed only among the
limited number of families that can afford them.
•
Consumption of vegetables has gradually decreased from 214gr/capita/day in 1985 to
190 gr/ capita/ day in 2010. Although total consumption has decreased, vegetable
consumption is more diversified than previously, possibily contributing to improved
nutrient intakes.
•
Nut and sesame product consumption doubled from 1985-2010. The mean intake per
capita per day was 2.2gr in 1985 and rose to 4.5gr in 2010. While the average rate of
consumption has only doubled in the past 25 years, the production rate has more than
doubled to meet the needs of a population that has grown very quickly.
1.4.3. Changes in protein and fat intake
Figure 4.54. Changes in protein and fat intake in the diet
80
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.12. Changes in food consumption in the General Nutrition Surveys
1964-5
1970-75
1981-85
1987-9
2000
2010
Animal protein
13.4
12.2
13.6
18.0
20.8
30.6
Total protein
47.0
60.0
52.0
57.0
62.0
74.3
Vegetable fat
4.7
4.7
5.6
10.0
14.0
14.5
Total fat
11.6
11.0
12.0
18.0
24.9
37.7
Changes in nutrient intake were depicted in Figure 4.54. and Table 4.12. above:
Nationally, protein intake increased by 22.3gr between 1985-2010, from 52 gr/capita/day
in 1985, to 57 gr/capita/day in 1989, 62gr/capita/day in 2000, and 74.3gr in 2010. It is
noted that the increase in animal protein in the diet resulted in an increased ratio of
animal protein to total protein, from 26.1% in 1985, 31.5% in 1989, 33.5% in 2000, and
41.2% in 2010. There are significant differences in protein consumption between urban
and rural areas. Mean daily protein intake amongst urban populations was 84.3gr/ capita/
day with the ratio of animal protein to total protein of 48%, whereas in the rural areas,
the mean total protein consumption was 73.8gr/ capita/ day. Although the mean protein
consumption in rural populations is not significantly different from those of urban
areas,the ratio of animal protein to total protein was significantly lower at 37%. The
current recommended ratio of animal protein to total protein for adults was 30-35%, with
rural populations very closely achieving the ideal ratio, and urban populations exceeding
it more than 10%.
•
Oil and fat intake per capita per day increased by 25.7gr between 1985-2010. Consumption increased gradually over time from 12gr in 1985, to 18gr in 1989, 24.9gr in 2000, and
finally to 37.7gr in 2010. Vegetable oil now accounts for 38.4% of total daily fat intake,
meeting the ideal ratio of fat from animal fats to total fat (not higher than 60%).
2. Dietary energy intake and energy proportion
Figure 4.55. Proportion of energy from protein,
fat and carbohydrate in the Vietnam 2009
General Nutrition survey
81
PART D
•
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Although the level of total energy consumption from 1985 to present was almost
unchanged (1925 ± 230 kcal in 1981 and 1925,4 ± 587 kcal in 2010), dietary composition has
changed remarkably. The proportion of energy from protein, fat and carbohydrate (P: L: C)
in 1985 was 11.2: 6.2: 82.6, compared with 2009 data which show a major shift in consumption with a ratio of 15.9: 17.8: 66.3 (P: L: C). The current energy proportion is considered to be
relatively ideal. The change in dietary patterns show that dietary consumption in Viet Nam
has improved remarkably, highlighting the need to update nutritional guidelines to reflect
recent changes in order to avoid overcompensation leading to overweight and other
conditions with a negative impact on health.
PART D
2.1. Dietary energy proportion by ecological region
Figure 4.56. Proportion of energy by ecological region
In the Mekong River Delta, energy from carbohydrates accounted for 70% of total energy
consumption with 14.5% energy contribution from fat - the lowest proportion amongst all
regions. Mean total energy consumption was the highest in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas (2035 kcal /person /day). Energy proportion from protein was lowest in the Central
Highlands at 13.7%.
82
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.57. Energy intake by ecological region
Amongst the six ecological zones, the highest percentage of households who consumed
less than 1800 kcal per capita per day were observed in the North Central and Central Coastal
areas (22%), Central Highlands (16.6%), and the Red River Delta (15.1%). The distribution of
households with high energy intake (>2400 kcal) and low energy levels (<1800 kcal) is
depicted in Fig. 4.57. Although the proportion of households who consumed less than 1800
kcal per capita was highest in the North Central and Central Coastal areas (22%), the region
simultaneously had a 42% prevalence of households with the energy consumption greater
than 2400 kcal.
Food security remains a challenging issue, particularly the differentiation in food
consumption at the household level, along with of the disparity between the rich and poor,
and by ecological region.
2.2. Changes in the contribution of energy, protein, and fat from food intake using data
from the Vietnam General Nutrition Surveys
Analysis of the proportion of the energy from foods in the diet enables detection of the
changes in the actual diet of the people over time, furthering development of specific
interventions for the National Nutrition Strategy and leading to improvement in the forecast
of nutrition problems in the population. Current data clearly indicate a major shift in dietary
consumption and diversity therefore, dietary guidelines should be strengthened in a timely
manner, with specific focus on subjects by gender, age, occupation and health status.
83
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
2.2.1. Composition of dietary energy sources
Figure 4.58. Per cent contribution of foods to
total energy in the diet in 1990
PART D
Figure 4.58 shows the percentage
contribution of foods to the daily energy
intake in 1990: Rice (84%), Vegetables
(3.3%), Eggs, Meat, and other foods
combined (3.2%), Fish and seafood (2.6%),
Oils (1.3%).
Figure 4.59. Per cent contribution of foods to
total energy in the diet in 2000
Figure 4.59 shows that the percentage
contribution of foods to the daily energy
consumption in 2000 had changed the
order of foods. Rice was still ranked as the
top contributor of energy, but at lower per
cent of total kcals. Daily energy sources
were comprised of: Rice (74.6%), Meat and
eggs (7.3%), Vegetables (5.9%), Oils (3.1%),
Fish and seafood (2.8%), and other foods
(2.7%).
Figure 4.60. Per cent contribution of foods to
total energy in the diet in 2009-2010
By 2010, the composition of daily
energy consumption continues to change,
with the most significant reduction of daily
energy coming from rice and increasing in
other categories. Figure 4.60 shows the
breakdown of energy in 2010: Rice (66.4%),
Eggs and Meat (12.2%), other foods (6.2%),
Vegetables (5.7%), Oils and fats (3.6%), Fish
and seafood (3.4%), and sugar, honey,
sweets (1.6%).
84
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
2.2.2. Composition of dietary protein sources
Figure 4.61. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total protein in the diet in 1990
Figure 4.61 shows the percent contribution of foods to the daily total protein
intake in 1990: Rice (62.3%), Fish and
seafood (14.5 %), Eggs and Meat (8.1%), Oils
(1.5%).
PART D
Figure 4.62. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total protein in the diet in 2000
Figure 4.62 shows the percent contribution of foods to the daily total protein
intake in 2000: Rice (50.9%), Meat and Eggs
(16.5%), Fish and seafood (14.1%), Vegetables (13%), and other foods (1.8%).
Figure 4.63. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total protein in the diet in 2010
Figure 4.63. reveals a significant reduction in the percent contribution from rice
to the daily total protein intake in 2010:
Rice (41.4%), Eggs and Meat (24.9%), Fish
and seafood (15.8%), Vegetables (11.4%),
and other foods (4.1%).
85
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
2.2.3. Composition of dietary fat sources
Figure 4.64. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total fat in the diet in 1990
PART D
The percent contribution of foods to
the daily total fat intake in 1990 are shown
with the following order: Rice (34.6%), and
Eggs and Meat (24.2%), Fats (13.3%), and
Fish and seafood (10%).
Figure 4.65. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total fat in the diet in 2000
The percent contribution of foods to
the daily total fat intake in 2000 are shown
with the following order: Meat and Eggs
(35.5%), Rice (20.3%), Fats (20.2%), and Fish
and seafood (7.1%).
Figure 4.66. The percent contribution of food
intake in the total fat in the diet in 2010
The contribution of foods to the daily
total fat intake in 2010 are shown with the
following order: Meat and Eggs provided
the most fat (47.1%), followed by Oils (19%),
Rice (14.6%), Fish and seafood (6.9%).
86
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
VI. FOOD CONSUMPTION IN CHILDREN FROM 2-4 YEARS
1. Main findings on the dietary intake in children 2-4 years old
Among young children, rice is considered the staple food, with a mean consumption of
204.7g/ child/ day. Other staple foods, such as potato (tubers) and wheat flour were consumed
in almost negligible amounts. Consumption of beans, a good source of vegetable protein,
was found at an average of 9.2g/ child/ day. The prevalence of oil-rich seeds, such as groundnut and sesame, in the diet of children from 2-5 was almost negligible in all regions (0.6g/
child/ day - Appendix Table G1). Oils and fats, a good source of energy and vital for brain
development, were also consumed in very low levels in all ecological regions (1.6 and 0.7g/
child/ day - Appendix Table G1).
Intake of green vegetables and ripe fruits was 46.9g and 50.6g/ child/ day, respectively.
Ripe fruits were consumed in the greatest quantity in the Red River Delta (60.7g/ child/ day)
and South East (77.1g/ child/ day). Nationally, children from 2-5 years consumed 10g/day of
beans and nuts. Tofu, another good source of protein with a relatively low cost for consumers,
was consumed in very low amounts by children in this age group (10g/ child/ day).
2. The nutritive value of dietary intake
Mean energy intake among children 2-5 years was reported at 1143 kcal/ child/ day,
meeting 93-98% of the the RDA for energy (Appendix Table G4). Total dietary protein
consumption was 47g/ child/ day. High quality animal protein plays an important role in the
growth and development of children, however, current intakes were only at 16.3g/ child/ day,
with the lowest consumption in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas (10.6g/ child/ day)
and the Central Highlands (14g/ child/ day)(Appendix Table G2). The ratio of animal protein to
total protein in the diet of children surveyed was 35%, failing to meet the NIN’s recommended
ratio for children at this age of 50% of total protein from animal sources.
Another nutrient of special concern is calcium, a mineral that helps the body to form
strong bones and teeth. Nationally, the average consumption of calcium is 501 mg/ child/
day. Amongst all ecological regions, current calicium intakes varied greatly, with many failing
to meet the Adequate Intake for children at this age. The lowest intakes were observed in the
Northern Midland and Mountain areas (247 mg/ child/ day), the Central Highlands (387 mg/
child/ day ), the North Central and Central Coastal areas (451 mg/ child/ day), and Red River
Delta (460 mg/ child/ day)(Appendix Table G2). Furthermore, the calcium:phosphorous ratio in
the diet was 0.73, which does not met the NIN’s recommendation.
87
PART D
Consumption of animal-based foods such as meats, eggs, and milk, was 50.1g/ day, 13.9g/
day, and 135.6g/ child/ day, respectively. In particular, there is a high consumption of milk in
the South East region, which includes Ho Chi Minh City (229g/ child/ day - Appendix Table G1).
Consumption of eggs and milk was observed at the lowest level in the Northern Midland and
Mountain areas and the Central Highlands. Meat and egg consumption was highest in the
Red River Delta and the Southeast area and lowest in the North Central and the Central
Coastal areas. Nationally, milk powder and cheese consumption was 12.6 g/ child/ day, with
the highest level in the South East (25g/ child/ day - Appendix Table G1) and Mekong River
Delta (18g/ child/ day - Appendix Table G1).
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The average dietary consumption of iron was 6.5 mg/child/day, which failed to reach the
Recommended Dietary Allowances for children at this age. The bioavailability of iron in the
diet was found at a moderatelevel of bioavailability, thus, only about 5-10% of iron in the diet
was actually absorbed.
PART D
The amount of vitamin A from animal sources in the diet was on average of 252
mcg/child/day. Vitamin A consumption was found to be at lowest level in the Northern
Midland and Mountain areas (135 mcg/child/day), the Central Highlands (141 mcg/child/day),
and the North Central and Central Coastal areas (170 mcg/ child/ day)(Appendix Table G2).
Figure 4.67. Composition of dietary energy intake by ecological region
A good balance of total energy from dietary protein, fat, and carbohydrate is important
to provide all necessary nutrition components for development. Fat are most notably
important as a source of essential fatty acids for brain development and growth in children.
The contribution of energy from fat in the diet was 21% nationally (Appendix G3), meeting
the NIN’s Recommendation for balanced diets for children in this age group, with a goal of ≤
20% of total energy from lipds.
Figure 4.68. Average rice consumption by child’s nutritional status (g/child/day)
88
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
PART D
Figure 4.69. Average rice consumption by age group (g/child/day)
According to Figure 4.69., the mean consumption of rice in children aged 25-35 months
and 36-59 months was 183g/day and 216g/day, respectively, showing an increase of about
18% by age group. Average rice consumption by underweight and stunted children did not
vary significantly from children who were not underweight, and those who were not stunted
(Figure 4.68).
Table 4.13. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes (DRI)
met in children 24-59 months by nutrient
Percentage of DRI
n = 1553
Energy (%)
96
Vitamin A (%)
65
Vitamin B1 (%)
137
Vitamin B2 (%)
153
vitamin B3 (%)
123
Vitamin C (%)
129
Calcium (%)
101
89
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.14. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met in children
24-59 months by nutrient and age group
Age groups
PART D
Percentage of nutrient intake met DRI
24-35 months
36-59 months
n = 610
n = 1063
Energy (%)
95
96
Vitamin A (%)
72
62
Vitamin B1 (%)
144
133
Vitamin B2 (%)
166
146
Vitamin B3 (%)
137
118
Vitamin C (%)
115
137
Iron (%)
57
77
Table 4.13 shows the percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met according to nutrient
in children 24-59 months by age group. Overall, diets of children between 24-35 months were
more adequate to meet the Dietary Reference Intakes than children in the older age group
(36-59 months). One possibility is that as children grow older, parents may take less care of
what they eat. It may also be due to time constraints, the family’s limited awareness of the
importance of the proper dietary intake, or the addition of a younger sibling requiring more
attention. It is clear that consistent failure to meet the Dietary Reference Intakes is correlated
to children remaining undernourished and will impact the child's development later in life.
Additionally, iron intakes in children 24-35 months met only 57% of the Dietary Reference
Intake, with slight improvement noted in children 36-59 months, who met 77% of DRI.
Approaches to prevent anaemia in children, therefore, should target young children who are
at high risk, specifically from birth through 3 years of age. The fortification of iron in foods
for young children is an important and urgent approach in reducing the rate of anaemia in
children.
90
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table 4.15. Percentage of Dietary Reference Intakes met by children
24-59 months by the classification of undernutrition
Classification of malnutrition
Percentage of nutrient
intake met Dietary
Reference Intake
Underweight
n = 496
n = 393
Energy (%)
89
89
Vitamin B1 (%)
115
117
Vitamin B2 (%)
118
116
Vitamin C (%)
102
102
Iron (%)
62
63
Vitamin A (%)
38
43
Vitamin B3 (%)
105
105
Calcium (%)
85
73
PART D
Stunting
Dietary intakes of stunted and underweight children did not meet the DRI of most nutrients required for optimal growth (except the protein intake). The RDA for most nutrients
recorded in Table 4.15. were met nearly at the same level in the stunted children and underweight children. Key differences include a higher consumption of calcium in stunted children
(85% DRI met, compared with 73% in underweight children), and higher vitamin A in underweight children (43% DRI met, compared with 38% in stunted children).
Overall, inadequate intakes were quite seriously observed for some nutrients, including
vitamin A, iron, and calcium. In stunted children, intakes met only 38% of the DRI for vitamin
A, and in underweight children, intakes met only 73% of the DRI for calcium. Although protein
met the DRI, dietary insufficiency of other nutrients and poor quality of nutrients, especially
micronutrients, wil have a negative impact on growth.
Correcting not only basic issues of food security, but of more specific nutrients, such as
vitamin A, iron, and calcium, present a significant challenge in improving the nutritional
status of people in Viet Nam in the coming years (Appendix, Table G4).
VII. KAP REPORT ON HOUSEHOLD FOOD SAFETY
1. Percentage of people who have seen/heard/learnt about food safety
Nationally, 82.1% of consumers report having seen, heard, or learnt about food safety.
This figure was consistent in the Red River Delta, North Central and Central Coastal areas,
91
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Central Highlands and South East areas. The lowest rates were found in the Northern Midland
and Mountain areas and Mekong River Delta (75.1% and 75.6%, respectively).
Table 4.16. Percentage of people who have seen/heard/learnt
about food safety
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
PART D
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Have ever
seen/heard/
learned
87.8
75.1
87.4
85.6
87.3
75.6
82.1
Never
5.3
12.6
6.8
7.0
10.8
14.4
9.7
2. Sources of information on food hygiene and safety
Table 4.17 shows that television was the main source of information, which provided
knowledge on food hygiene and food safety in 52.3-73.0% households surveyed by region.
In addition, information from medical staff, loud speakers, and radio played a lesser, but
important role in providing knowledge on food hygiene and food safety.
Table 4.17. Main sources of information on food hygiene and safety
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Loud speaker,
radio
17.4
7.0
13.8
2.3
10.5
11.7
11.3
Television
62.1
52.3
59.8
73.0
65.1
56.4
59.1
Book, newspaper,
leaflets
1.5
0.8
0.6
0.8
1.8
1.3
1.1
Health staff
5.5
13.4
11.5
9.2
7.7
4.6
9.2
Internet
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
92
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
3. Causes of food poisoning
Amongst people interviewed in the Red River Delta and Northern Midland and Mountain
areas, 50% believed that pesticides were a cause of food poisoning. In other areas, although the
rate is lower, 34.9 to 39% still consider pesticides as a main cause of food poisoning. Nationally,
only 57.9% of those surveyed knew that spoiled food was a cause of food poisoning.
Table 4.18. Causes of food poisoning
Eco zone
Option
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
PART D
Red
River
Delta
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Bacteria
14.2
9.3
14.5
12.0
18.7
10.7
12.7
Mold
10.3
21.7
9.8
8.0
16.6
5.2
12.4
Pesticides
51.3
50.0
38.0
34.9
39.0
35.0
42.5
Antibiotic residue
1.6
2.9
3.2
1.2
4.9
1.4
2.5
Poison
mushroom
6.6
30.2
9.9
24.7
11.0
4.1
14.4
8.3
8.8
7.1
3.5
16.2
4.9
7.8
Rancid food
62.2
55.2
68.9
57.3
61.2
41.4
57.9
Chemical
contaminants
20.5
14.3
15.8
14.0
16.6
16.0
16.2
Microbial
contaminants
18.4
11.3
20.4
15.4
19.0
12.1
15.8
Unsafe food
processing
24.3
12.6
31.6
24.2
42.3
26.9
25.2
Non-hygiene
eating habit
25.9
13.5
31.6
23.4
30.7
22.8
23.9
Others
1.7
1.1
2.4
0.7
2.7
5.4
2.4
Illegal food
preservatives
93
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
4. Knowledge of prevention of food poisoning
Amongst households surveyed, awareness of prevention methods varied greatly by
region. Knowledge of personal hygiene during food processing was lowest in the Northern
Midland and Mountain areas with only 17.4% aware, and was highest in the North Central
and Central Coastal areas (34.2%) and South East areas (38.5), although even the best rates
represented a relatively low awareness to prevent food poisoning. The message of adequately
cooking foods seemed to be the most understood, with rates from 52.3-71.8% of people
amongst all regions aware of the connection of cooking foods and risk of food poisoning
(Table 4.19).
PART D
Table 4.19. Knowledge of people on how to prevent food poisoning
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Personal
hygiene during
processing food
25.9
17.4
34.2
21.2
38.5
22.3
25.9
Store raw and
cooked food separately
19.1
14.1
20.5
14.2
29.5
15.1
18.0
Cook well
64.9
64.7
71.7
61.6
71.8
52.3
64.5
Cook well and
keep in freezer
11.4
9.6
9.7
8.8
16.5
6.3
9.8
Use clean water
for cooking
24.4
17.5
22.2
35.6
30.7
22.2
23.1
Use fresh and
wholesome food
19.9
13.2
18.0
19.2
14.7
16.4
16.7
Select food
carefully
27.6
25.7
35.1
23.5
46.5
32.2
31.1
Cultivate their
own safe
vegetables
30.7
39.4
19.5
26.4
11.7
14.8
25.2
Others
3.0
1.4
3.6
2.0
4.7
5.6
3.3
94
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
5. Proportion of people who consumed raw or are meat or fish
According to Table 4.20.,most people interviewed (national average of 96%) reported that
they did not eat raw or undercooked meat or fish. The results show that this is not a common
habit amongst Vietnamese people, carring a low risk for food poisoning.
Table 4.20. The proportion of people who consumed raw or rare meat or fish
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Yes
2.5
4.7
2.7
5.2
4.2
1.6
3.3
No
96.7
94.3
96.7
94
95.5
97.5
96
6. Proportion of people who consumed salad or blood pudding in the last 12 months
Similarly, a small per cent of people reported consumption of raw salad or blood pudding
in the last 12 months. Prevalence in the Northern Midland and Mountain and Red River Delta
areas were highest with 13.5% and 11.9%, respectively. Intakes were lowest in the Mekong
River Delta (1.6%) and South East (4.9%).
Table 4.21. The proportion of people who consumed raw salad
or blood pudding
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Yes
11.9
13.5
6
8.3
4.9
1.6
8.1
No
87.2
85.4
93.2
90.8
94.7
97.3
91
95
PART D
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
7. Proportion of people who consumed raw egg or uncooked egg in the last 12 months
Similarly, there was a small per cent of people interviewed (2.4% national average) who
had consumed raw or uncooked egg in the last 12 months.
Table 4.22. The proportion of people who consumed raw egg or uncooked egg
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
PART D
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Yes
2.3
3.3
0.7
1
1.3
4.7
2.4
No
97
95.8
98.7
97.7
98
94.3
96.8
8. Use of separate cutting boards and knives for raw and cooked food
The survey found that nationally, about 45% of respondents did not use separate knives
and cutting boards for raw and cooked foods. This message should be more emphasized in
the development of communication materials on food hygiene and safety to raise awareness
of the connection of cross-contamination and food poisoning.
Table 4.23. Use of separate cutting boards and knives for raw and cooked food
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Yes
57.2
46.3
52.4
46.6
66.6
62.5
54.4
No
41.6
52.7
46.6
52.4
32.8
36.4
44.6
9. Length of time between cooking and eating foods
Survey results indicate that most people consumed food less than 2 hours after cooking
(86.1-93.9%). The length of time that foods remain between 4 and 60 degrees C (room
96
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
temperature after cooking) greatly increases bacteria content leading to increased risk of food
poisoning.
Table 4.24. Length of time between cooking
and eating foods
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
92.5
86.1
90.7
88.1
89.5
93.9
90.2
More than 2 hours
5
8.9
7.4
8.8
5.4
4.7
6.8
PART D
Less than 2 hours
10. Keeping leftover food for the next meal
The practice of keeping food left over from one meal to consume at the next meal varies
amongst regions. People in the Red River Delta and South East areas are more likely to use a
refrigerator to keep leftover food (42.8% and 36.9%, respectively). This result was understandable as these two regions are more urbanised and have higher economic conditions,
compared with other regions . In other areas, the household usually kept the leftover food
for longer than two hours at room temperature, posing an increased risk for food spoilage
and food poisoning.
Table 4.25. Keeping left - over food for the next meal
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Keep in freezer
42.8
18.8
20.1
18.4
36.9
18.2
24.6
Keep at room
temperature for
less than 2h
19.9
16.7
19.6
28.5
19.7
25.7
20.7
Keep at room
temperature
for more than 2h
25.9
42.6
49.5
33.6
28.1
31.7
37.6
Others
9.3
17.7
8.6
16.4
12.4
19.6
13.9
97
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
11. Practice of washing vegetables and fruits before cooking or eating
Most people reported a regular practice of washing vegetables and fruits with clean
water, at least three times, before cooking or eating.
Table 4.26. Practice of washing vegetables and fruits before cooking or eating
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
PART D
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Wash throughly
under running
water
21.4
29.3
26.2
32.1
26.7
11.3
23.9
Wash by clean
water at least
3 times
82.6
66.4
75.4
57.4
83.7
84.6
75.5
Don’t know, no
answer, don’t
remember
0.1
1.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
0
0.4
12. Practice of washing cooking and eating utensils
Most of the households reported washing utensils with clean water and dishwashing
liquid, with the lowest rate 60.7%, in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas, and the
highest, 84.7%, in the Red River Delta.
Table 4.27. Practice of washing cooking and eating utensils
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Clean water
11.9
29
16.9
13.9
19.6
21.4
19.9
Clean water and
dishwashing
liquid
84.7
60.7
81.3
82.6
78.5
72.4
75.1
98
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
0.9
7.9
0.3
1.8
0.1
0.2
2.3
Don’t know,
no answer
0.3
0.4
0
0
0.1
0.2
0.2
Others
0.7
1.1
0.6
0.3
0.7
4.7
1.5
PART D
Wash and clean by
hot water
13. Practice of washing hands before eating or after using the toilet
One of the most concerning results of the survey was the high proportion of respondents
who did not wash their hands after using the toilet (10.9-28.2% by region, 21% national
average) or before handling food (26.7-63.1% by region, 49.1% national average). This is a poor
practice, which carrys a high risk of bacterial contamination leading to food poisoning, and
food safety messages should provide further emphasis on this practice.
Table 4.28. Practice of washing hands before eating or after using the toilet
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Wash hand
before handling
food
48.5
36.9
51.3
59.9
73.3
62.6
51.9
Wash hand after
using toilet
87.7
73.3
75.6
71.8
89.1
81.2
79.0
14. Knowledge on sign of food poisoning
The survey shows that knowledge regarding signs of food poisoning was quite good.
According to the national average, 69.7% of respondants were aware that nausea and vomiting were signs of food poisoning, and 73.6% of people were aware of the connection
between food poisoning and diarrhoea. Education about symptoms of food poisoning ap99
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
peared to be lowest in the Northern Midland and Mountain areas and Mekong River Delta,
with awareness for both of the major signs below national averages.
Table 4.29. Knowledge of food poisoning signs
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
PART D
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Nausea,
vomitting
73.8
60.9
76.5
72.5
79.6
62.8
69.7
Diarrhoea
86.8
70.4
78.8
73.3
73.9
59.0
73.6
Head ache
22.1
24.5
32.9
29.4
31.6
14.6
25.3
Seizuers
2.0
3.0
2.0
0.7
4.6
1.0
2.2
Coma
1.3
2.7
2.5
0.7
1.8
2.4
2.2
15. Food poisoning episodes reported in the last month by household
Within the month prior to the survey, a small proportion of households had reported an
episode of food poisoning, with a total of only 98 households in the whole country. The actual
number of cases of food poisoning may be difficult to assess since self-daignosis and
reporting vary by household.
Table 4.30. Food poisoning episodes in the last month by household
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
16
8
36
8
8
22
98
(1.10%)
(0.40%)
(1.80%)
(1.30%)
(1.10%)
(1.40%)
(1.20%)
1392
1982
1975
565
696
1456
8066
(97.1%)
(95.90%)
(96.40%)
(94.30%)
(97.20%)
(94.20%)
(95.90%)
Yes
No
100
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
16. Household food poisoning cases reported to health/local authority
Among households with a family member experiencing a food poisoning episode, only
a small percentage of people actually report it to the local authorities or health facility. The
estimated percentage of food poisoning episodes that were not reported is 75.5% nationwide. However, since the overall number of households reporting food poisoning episodes
is small, further investigation may not reveal much insight into the problem.
Table 4.31. Household food poisoning cases reported to health/local authority
Eco zone
Option
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
PART D
Red
River
Delta
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Yes
25.0
62.5
36.1
50.0
25.0
9.1
30.6
No
87.5
12.5
80.6
50.0
75.0
90.9
75.5
17. Health/local authority response following information about food poisoning
Because the proportion of people reported the occurrence of food poisoning is small,
information on the response of the government and health agencies is difficult to accurately
assess.
Table 4.32. Health/local authority response following information
about food poisoning
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Visit to provide
examination,
and treatment
support for
patients
75.0
100.0
61.5
25.0
0.0
100.0
63.3
Don’t visit but
consult for the
treatment
50.0
0.0
23.1
50.0
0.0
0.0
26.7
Don’t visit, don’t
do anything
50.0
0.0
61.5
25.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
101
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
18. Collection of samples for testing when food poisoning occurs
Similarly, due to the small proportion of sporadic cases of food poisoning reported in
surveyed households, accurate analysis of sample collection can not be conducted.
Table 4.33. Collection of samples for testing when food poisoning occurs
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
PART D
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Yes
12.5
25.0
2.8
0.0
12.5
4.5
7.1
No
18.8
25.0
30.6
50.0
25.0
27.3
28.6
19. Response of families when food poisoning occurs
The response of family members following an episode of food poisoning varies by region,
with the most frequent response of seeking medical help by taking the family member to
the nearest health facility (40.9-62.5%).
Table 4.34. Response of families when food poisoning occurs
Eco zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Northern
Midlands
and
mountain
areas
Northern
Central
Central
and
HighCentral
lands
Coastal
areas
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
Southeast
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Total
Stop using
suspecious food
25.0
37.5
25.0
25.0
12.5
36.4
27.6
Induce vomitting
for the patients
12.5
12.5
19.4
25.0
0.0
4.5
13.3
Waiting for the
determination of
the causes
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
Bringing patients to the nearest
health facility
43.8
50.0
41.7
50.0
62.5
40.9
44.9
102
PART
E
CONCLUSION
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
The 4th General Nutrition Survey was conducted between 2009-2010. It has provided
many valuable inights into the current nutrition situation in Vietnam, with notable findings
described below:
1) In 2010, the prevalence of underweight (Weight - for - Age Z-score < -2.00) among
pre-school children was 17.5%. Of which, mild, moderate and severe underweight were
15.4%, 1.8% and 0.3%, respectively. Twenty out of 63 provinces/cities had prevalence of
underweight higher than 20%, considered at high level by the WHO's classification.
2) In 2010, stunting (Height-for-Age Z-score < -2.00) affected 29.3% of children under 5 years
old. The prevalence of stunting in 2 provinces was at very high level (40%) and was found
at high level (30-39%) in 31 provinces. The average rate of reduction in stunting was 1.3
percentage points per year from 1995 to 2010. The prevalence of wasting among children
under 5 (Weight-for-Height Z-score < -2.00) was 7.1%.
At present, total estimates of the number of undernourished children are 1.3 million, 2.1
million and about 520,000 for underweight, stunting and wasting, respectively.
Prevalence of undernutrition also varies greatly amongst ecological regions.
Rate of overweight and obesity amongst children under 5 years old is currently estimated
in 6.5% of children nationally. The current rate of obesity exceeds the control level defined
by NNS 2001-2010 at over 5% of children, and it is seen as high as 6.5% in large cities.
The current rate is 8 times higher than that in 2000.
3) Iron deficiency anaemia affected 29.2% of children under 5. Prevalence of iron deficiency
anaemia in non-pregnant women and pregnant women were 28.8% and 36.5%, respectively.
Vitamin A deficiency in Vietnam is now mainly subclinical, but still prevalent with national
levels of deficiency found in14.2% of children and about 35% of lactating mothers.
4) In children from 5-19 years of age, the prevalence of underweight is 24.2%, stunting is
23.4%, overweight/obesity is 8.5% and obesity alone is estimated at 2.5%. These figures
show that while undernutrition remains a major problem of public health in Vietnam,
there are evidences of emerging overweight and obesity in the urban population,
particularly in large cities.
5) The prevalence of Chronic Energy Deficiency in adults over 19 years old is 17.2%, with
the rate in men at 15.8% (CI95%: 14.6-17.0) and slightly higher in females at 18.5% (CI95%:
17.4-19.7).
6) The prevalence of overweight and obesity in adults over 19 years old is currently found
in 5.6% (CI95%: 4.99-6.37) of the general popuation. The rate in males is 4.9% (CI95%:
4.25-5.73) and observed at a slightly higher rate in females at 6.3% (CI95%: 5.45-7.25). The
prevalence of overweight/obesity is highest amongst men from 55-59 years old (7.8%)
and women from 50-55 years old (10.9%).
105
PART E
There is large variations amongst ecological regions, with stunting found at highest
prevalence in the Northern Midland and Mountain area, the North Central and Central
Coastal area, and the Central Highlands. Large cities tend to have the lowest prevalence
of stunting.
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
7) The rate of exclusive breastfeeding in children under 6 is quite low at 19.6%, although
the rate of predominantly breastfeeding is slightly higher at 25.4%.
8) The coverage of vitamin A supplementation in targeted children is 87.0%, and was 65.2%
in lactating mothers.
9) There is a clear trend of increased height in children under 5 based on the data from the
general surveys since 1985. The peak in height is now reached at earlier age, currently
peak height is reached between 20-24 years of age for both males and females, whereas
in 2000, it was not reached until 26-29 years. The average height of Vietnamese males,
between age 20-24, was found at 164.4 cm (±0.53) and 153.4 cm (±0.73) in females, age
20-24.
PART E
10) The situation of household food consumption is as follows:
•
The average energy intake is 1925.4 kcal/capita/day.
•
The average protein intake is 74.3g/capita/day, varying from 68.9g/capita/day in the
Central Highlands to 80.1g/capita/day in the South East.
•
Vitamin and mineral intake: the intake of vitamin A from animal food sources remains
low with an average of 0.17 mg/capita/day, meeting 32% RDA. The ratio of vitamin
B1/ 1000 kcal meets the recommendation in all regions. Dietary iron intake is 12.3
mg/ capita/ day with a medium biological value. Given the absorption rate of dietary
iron ranges from 5 to 10%, it is difficult for adolescents and women to meet the
requirement given reported levels of iron in the diet. The ratio of Calcium: Phosphorous ranges from 0.55 - 0.8 by region.
•
There has been a notable change in the proportion of total energy from protein, fat,
and carbohydrate. In 1983, energy composition was made up of 11.2% from protein,
6.2% from fat, and 82.6% from carbohydrate. Currently a more optimal ratio of
energy intake has been observed with 15.9% energy from protein,17.8% from fat,
and 66.3% from carbohydrate.
11) Amongst children 2-5 years old, food consumption provides an average energy intake
of 1143 kcal/child/day, meeting 93-98% of the requirement for age. The proportion of
animal protein to total protein is 35%, which does not meet the recommended standard
for the age group of > 50% of protein from animal-based foods. Dietary iron intake in
children between 24-35 months of age currently meets only 57% of the RDA and intakes
in children between 36-59 months meet 77% RDA. Vitamin A intake currently meets only
65% of the RDA for children 2-5 years old nationwide.
12) Nationally, 82.1% of consumers have learnt about food safety at some time, but only
57.9% of the people interviewed knew that spoiled food is a major cause of food poisoning. Furthermore, nearly 50% of people did not use separate utensils for raw and cooked
foods, and the proportion of not washing hands after using the toilet and before touching foods is 21% and 49%, respectively.
106
PART
F
RECOMMENDATIONS
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
1) Monitoring and evaluation on all levels should be strengthened in order to better support
child malnutrition control programmes.
Interventions for reduction of stunting should be focused on children from birth through
the first 2 years of life and throughout pregnancy. The programme aimed at stunting
reduction should specifically target poor households, mothers with poor nutrition status
(short and low BMI), and mothers with poor education. Specific attention should also be
given to ecological regions with a high stunting rate, such as Northern Midland and
Mountain areas, Northern Central and Coastal areas, and Central Highlands.
The programme for stunting reduction should ensure that communication is effective
to deliver nutrition messages to women with low levels of education. Additionally, high
stunting prevalence in children under 6 months old (about 11%) indicates that the
prevention should start in the pregnancy period.
Nutrition counseling services should be provided to parents during pregnancy, after
birth, and again when the child reaches 6 months of age to introduce adequate complementary feeding to improve dietary diversification for infants.
3) The trend of recent increased height observed should be monitored on a continual basis.
The phenomenon of ‘catch-up’ growth that often occurs following wars and economic
crises has been observed in Vietnam and should be monitored further. Due to the critical
nature of nutrition in the womb through the first 2 years of life, counseling on the
importance of maternal nutrition as well as breastfeeding and adequate complementary
feeding to ensure recommended levels of dietary micronutrient intake should be
provided.
4) The ratio of protein, fat, and carbohydrate is now 15.9: 17.8: 66.3, which is considered
optimal. The survey revealed that food consumption in the general population has
improved remarkably since 1985. However, updated guidance on proper nutrition is now
required in light of recent social and economic changes, in order to prevent emerging
trends of overconsumption that will damage health. Immediately at hand, food consumption amongst different target groups and regions should be considered to properly plan
interventions and approaches to meet specific needs.
5) Random evaluations should be set up in each locality to provide analysis for further
scaling-up of programmes. In the meantime, capacity building for programme implementation and evaluation, in all localities, should also be further strengthened.
109
PART F
2) Strategies to reduce micronutrient deficiencies should be reinforced, especially for iron
and vitamin A deficiency. This should be achieved through many different approaches,
including food fortification and diversification of intakes in order to increase micronutrient intakes in children as well as in the general population.
PART
G
APPENDIX
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX A: GENERAL INFORMATION OF THE SURVEY
Table A1. AGE AND SEX DISTRIBUTION
Age group
Male
Female
Male
(Pop survey)
Female
(Pop survey)
0-4
10.10
8.97
9.00
7.90
5-9
8.59
8.78
8.40
7.60
10-14
8.60
8.24
9.00
8.10
15-19
9.56
9.06
10.60
9.80
20-24
7.65
8.59
9.30
9.20
25-29
8.46
9.40
8.90
8.80
30-34
8.50
8.32
8.00
7.80
35-39
8.84
7.95
7.70
7.50
40-44
7.11
6.59
7.00
7.00
45-49
6.70
6.66
6.30
6.50
50-54
4.74
5.06
5.00
5.50
55-59
3.70
3.65
3.30
3.80
60-64
2.21
2.49
2.10
2.50
65+
5.23
6.26
5.30
7.90
APPENDIX A
Table A2. PROPORTION OF SURVEYED POPULATION BY ETHNICITY
Ethnicity
Male
Female
Total
(%)
N
(%)
N
(%)
N
Kinh
49.9
5327
50.1
5250
76.8
10577
Tay
56.8
325
43.2
297
4.5
622
H'mong
52.3
260
47.7
235
3.6
495
Thai
53.2
191
46.8
191
2.8
382
Muong
44.9
132
55.1
153
2.1
285
Nung
43.3
97
56.7
113
1.5
210
Dao
53.6
112
46.4
97
1.5
209
Kho me
50.5
83
49.5
84
1.2
167
Ba-na
52.9
45
47.1
41
0.6
86
Xo-đang
43.6
34
56.4
39
0.5
73
Gia-rai
52.6
35
47.4
23
0.5
68
San Chay
59.3
34
40.7
24
0.4
58
EđE
40.8
25
59.2
33
0.4
58
3.1
58
Other
113
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table A3. HOUSEHOLD SIZE AND PROPORTION OF HOUSEHOLDS
BY WEALTH INDEX
Percentile of wealth index
Ecological zone
Household
size
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
quintile quintile quintile quintile quintile
4.2
6.7
13.3
16.3
24.3
39.4
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
4.32
31.5
24.9
19.1
14.0
10.5
Northern Central and Coastal area
4.38
15.8
20.1
25
20.6
18.5
Central Highlands
4.69
23.9
20.2
21.9
18.6
15.5
Southeast
4.14
3.3
6.7
12.1
28.8
49.1
Mekong River Delta
4.46
21.1
18
19.8
22.8
18.3
Total
4.33
15.3
16.6
19
22.2
26.9
APPENDIX A
Red River Delta
114
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX B: VIETNAMESE NUTRITION STATUS
Table B1. PREVALENCE OF UNDERNUTRITION IN CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY SEVERITY IN 6 ECOLOGICAL REGIONS IN 2010
Underweight (%)
Province
Stunting (%)
N
Total
Grade I Grade II Grade III Total Grade I Grade II
Wasting
(%)
Total
94256
17.5
15.4
1.8
0.3
29.3
18.8
10.5
7.1
Red river delta
16682
14.6
13.2
1.3
0.1
25.5
15.2
10.3
6.1
1
Ha Noi
1540
10.8
9.8
1.0
0.1
21.8
13.9
7.9
4.8
2
Vinh Phuc
1520
19.3
17.5
1.6
0.2
27.9
16.8
11.1
6.8
3
Bac Ninh
1500
15.4
14.1
1.2
0.1
31.5
18.8
12.7
6.7
4
Quang Ninh
1502
17.8
16.0
1.7
0.1
28.0
17.8
10.2
7.2
5
Hai Duong
1512
16.6
15.6
1.0
0.0
26.6
14.1
12.5
6.9
6
Hai Phong
1524
12.3
11.0
1.3
0.0
24.9
13.8
11.1
5.8
7
Hung Yen
1502
16.8
15.9
0.9
0.0
28.9
18.2
10.7
6.7
8
Thai Binh
1524
17.3
15.5
1.6
0.2
26.7
15.4
11.3
7.8
9
Ha Nam
1500
17.4
16.0
1.3
0.1
27.5
16.3
11.2
6.9
10
Nam Đinh
1542
16.7
15.5
1.1
0.1
25.4
15.0
10.4
6.4
11
Ninh Binh
1516
19.8
18.5
1.2
0.1
31.2
18.5
12.7
7.3
21081
22,1
19,7
2,1
0,3
33,7
20,9
12,8
7,4
Northern midlands
and mountainous area
Ha Giang
1508
25.3
22.9
1.8
0.6
38.0
25.8
12.2
7.6
13
Cao Bang
1474
21.7
18.5
2.7
0.5
35.0
24.7
10.3
8.3
14
Bac Kan
1527
25.4
23.6
1.6
0.2
34.5
22.8
11.7
7.0
15
Tuyen Quang
1521
21.6
19.5
1.9
0.2
31.7
18.8
12.9
7.1
16
Lao Cai
1495
26.0
21.6
3.6
0.8
40.7
25.9
15.0
7.1
17
Yen Bai
1522
22.8
20.9
1.7
0.2
33.2
21.7
11.5
7.2
18
Thai Nguyen
1520
18.5
16.7
1.7
0.1
27.9
15.8
12.1
7.0
19
Lang Son
1544
21.6
19.2
2.0
0.4
31.0
18.2
12.8
7.2
20
Bac Giang
1500
19.6
17.1
2.3
0.2
31.9
18.6
13.3
7.8
21
Phu Tho
1500
19.4
16.8
2.3
0.3
30.8
18.7
12.1
7.8
22
Dien Bien
1428
22.5
20.0
2.2
0.3
34.5
19.3
15.2
7.1
23
Lai Chau
1514
26.5
23.9
2.2
0.4
37.2
23.2
14.0
7.3
24
Son La
1516
22.8
21.0
1.5
0.3
36.7
22.2
14.5
7.3
25
Hoa Binh
1512
22.7
20.6
1.8
0.3
30.6
19.2
11.4
7.1
North central and
coastal area
20920
19.8
17.6
2.0
0.2
31.4
19.3
12.1
7.6
APPENDIX B
12
26
Thanh Hoa
1530
23.2
20.8
2.0
0.4
33.7
18.8
14.9
8.0
27
Nghe An
1528
21.7
19.6
1.8
0.3
32.9
21.8
11.1
8.2
28
Ha Tinh
1428
21.8
18.6
2.8
0.4
34.7
23.0
11.7
10.2
115
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Underweight (%)
Province
Total
Grade I Grade II Grade III Total Grade I Grade II
Wasting
(%)
29
Quang Binh
1528
23.6
21.6
1.9
0.1
35.2
21.8
13.4
7.2
30
Quang Tri
1492
19.5
18.2
1.3
0
32.9
17.1
12.8
7.1
31
Thua Thien Hue
1512
16.6
15.4
1.2
0
29.5
17.5
12.0
7.2
32
Đa Nang
1422
7.8
7.0
0.7
0.1
19.9
11.9
8.0
4.9
33
Quang Nam
1526
18.2
15.7
2.2
0.3
32.8
20.9
11.9
6.8
34
Quang Ngai
1522
19.2
16.2
2.6
0.4
29.8
16.0
13.8
6.9
35
Binh Đinh
1520
19.3
16.3
2.7
0.3
29.7
16.9
12.8
7.0
36
Phu Yen
1522
19.1
16.9
1.9
0.3
31.8
21.0
10.8
6.8
37
Khanh Hoa
1516
15.7
13.4
2.0
0.3
27.2
17.2
10.3
8.2
38
Ninh Thuan
1528
23.5
19.5
3.9
0.1
31.6
18.4
12.6
8.4
39
Binh Thuan
1346
19.7
17.9
1.5
0.3
32.1
17.5
14.6
6.8
Central highlands
7207
24.7
20.6
3.6
0.5
35.2
21.4
13.8
8.1
40
Kon Tum
1518
28.3
21.6
5.3
1.4
41.6
24.2
17.4
9.2
41
Gia Lai
1523
26.3
21.2
4.6
0.5
36.2
22.4
13.8
9.3
42
Dak Lak
1528
27.0
23.8
2.8
0.4
36.9
22.6
14.3
8.2
43
Dac Nong
1112
26.9
24.0
2.8
0.1
38.0
25.1
12.9
7.0
44
Lam Dong
1526
16.5
14.1
2.3
0.1
27.0
16.4
10.6
6.5
8929
10.7
9.5
1.0
0.2
19.2
10.7
8.5
5.2
Southeast
APPENDIX B
Stunting (%)
N
45
Binh Phuoc
1502
19.9
16.4
3.3
0.2
33.0
20.3
12.7
8.6
46
Tay Ninh
1512
17.2
15.7
1.2
0.3
28.5
18.7
9.8
6.6
47
Binh Duong
1508
12.9
12.0
0.6
0.3
26.5
16.0
10.5
6.2
48
Dong Nai
1442
12.4
11.4
0.8
0.2
30.8
19.1
11.7
6.8
49
Ba Ria Vung Tau
1465
12.0
10.9
1.1
0
25.7
14.8
10.9
7
50
Ho Chi Minh (*)
1500
6.8
6.3
0.4
0.1
7.8
6.9
0.9
3.3
19437
16.8
14.5
2.1
0.2
28.2
17.1
11.1
7.4
Mekong river delta
51
Long An
1546
14.4
13.2
1.1
0.1
24.5
15.0
9.5
6.6
52
Tien Giang
1500
15.6
13.3
2.1
0.2
28.1
17.2
10.9
9.5
53
Ben Tre
1517
16.3
14.8
1.3
0.2
26.9
15.7
11.2
6.4
54
Tra Vinh
1459
19.3
17.0
2.0
0.3
28.9
19.3
9.6
7.6
55
Vinh Long
1510
18.8
17.2
1.4
0.2
28.9
17.0
11.9
7.2
56
Dong Thap
1540
17.3
14.6
2.3
0.4
29.8
16.6
13.2
7.5
57
An Giang
1528
17.0
14.8
1.9
0.3
28.7
17.7
11.0
7.1
58
Kien Giang
1567
17.3
14.8
2.2
0.3
26.9
15.7
11.2
6.5
59
Can Tho
1468
15.9
13.4
2.3
0.2
26.4
15.2
11.2
6.2
60
Hau Giang
1456
16.4
13.6
2.5
0.3
31.0
22.2
8.8
7.4
61
Soc Trang
1420
18.3
15.1
2.9
0.3
29.9
18.1
11.8
9.1
62
Bac Lieu
1448
17.0
14.5
2.3
0.2
28.8
17.6
11.2
7.5
63
Ca Mau
1478
17.2
14.6
2.3
0.3
28.6
16.9
11.7
7.8
* Data from NIN – GSO Survey 2010
116
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B2. PREVALENCE OF MALNUTRITION OF CHILDREN
UNDER 5 IN 2010
Province
Underweight (%)
Stunting
Wasting
[95%CI]
[95%CI]
[95%CI]
N
Total
94.256
17.5 [16.9-18.1]
29.3 [28.9 - 29.7]
7.1 [6.8 - 7.4]
Red river delta
16682
14.6 [14.2-15.1]
25.5 [24.2-26.8]
6.1 [5.4-6.8]
1
Ha Noi
1540
10.8 [8.8-12.8]
21.8 [18.2 - 25.4]
4.8 [3.7 - 5.9]
2
Vinh Phuc
1520
19.3 [16.4 - 22.2]
27.9 [24.5 - 31.3]
6.8 [5.3 - 8.3]
3
Bac Ninh
1500
15.4 [13.2 - 17.6]
31.5 [28.2 - 34.8]
6.7 [5.7 - 7.7]
4
Quang Ninh
1502
17.8 [14.4 - 21.2]
28.0 [23.5 - 32.5]
7.2 [5.7 - 8.7]
5
Hai Duong
1512
16.6 [14.8 - 18.4]
26.6 [23.7 - 29.6]
6.9 [5.2 - 8.6]
6
Hai Phong
1524
12.3 [10.0 - 14.6]
24.9 [23.3 - 36.5]
5.8 [3.9 – 7.7]
7
Hung Yen
1502
16.8 [13.5 - 20.2]
28.9 [26.3 - 31.5]
6.7 [4.7 - 8.7]
8
Thai Binh
1524
17.3 [14.9 - 19.7]
26.7 [23.7 - 29.7]
7.8 [5.7 - 9.9]
9
Ha Nam
1500
17.4 [15.3 - 19.5]
27.5 [25.1 - 29.9]
6.9 [5.7 - 8.1]
10
Nam Đinh
1542
16.7 [15.0 - 18.4]
25.4 [22.5 - 28.3]
6.4 [4.7 - 8.1]
11
Ninh Binh
1516
19.8 [17.8 - 21.8]
31.2 [28.6 - 33.8]
7.3 [6.3 - 8.3]
21081
22.1 [21.6-22.6]
33.7 [33.1-34.3]
7.4 [6.3-8.5]
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
Ha Giang
1508
25.3 [21.9 - 28.8]
38.0 [32.6 - 43.4]
7.6 [5.6 - 9.6]
13
Cao Bang
1474
21.7 [17.1 - 26.3]
35.0 [29.5 - 40.5]
8.3 [6.3 - 10.3]
14
Bac Kan
1527
25.4 [23.4 - 27.4]
34.5 [31.1 - 37.9]
7.0 [5.6 - 8.4]
15
Tuyen Quang
1521
21.6 [17.9 - 25.3]
31.7 [25.7 - 37.7]
7.1 [4.8 - 9.4]
16
Lao Cai
1495
26.0 [22.3 - 29.7]
40.7 [34.7 - 46.7]
7.1 [4.8 - 9.4]
17
Yen Bai
1522
22.8 [19.1 - 26.5]
33.2 [27.2 - 39.2]
7.2 [4.9 - 9.5]
18
Thai Nguyen
1520
18.5 [15.2 - 21.9]
27.9 [25.3 - 30.5]
7.0 [5.0 - 9.0]
19
Lang Son
1544
21.6 [17.9 - 25.3]
31.0 [25.0 - 37.0]
7.2 [4.9 - 9.5]
20
Bac Giang
1500
19.6 [16.5 - 22.7]
31.9 [26.9 - 36.9]
7.8 [6.3 - 9.4]
21
Phu Tho
1500
19.4 [15.6 - 23.2]
30.8 [25.8 - 35.8]
7.8 [4.8 - 10.8]
22
Dien Bien
1428
22.5 [19.1 - 25.9]
34.5 [27.4 - 41.6]
7.1 [4.4 - 9.8]
23
Lai Chau
1514
26.5 [24.2 - 28.8]
37.2 [32.3 - 42.2]
7.3 [5.6 - 9.0]
24
Son La
1516
22.8 [19.1 - 26.5]
36.7 [35.6 - 37.9]
7.3 [3.3 - 11.3]
25
Hoa Binh
1512
22.7 [19.4 - 26.0]
30.6 [26.1 - 35.1]
7.1 [5.7 - 8.5]
North central and
coastal area
20,920
19.8 [19.0-20.6]
31.4 [30.8-32.0]
7.6 [7.0-8.2]
APPENDIX B
12
26
Thanh Hoa
1530
23.2 [20.4 - 26.1]
33.7 [30.0 - 37.4]
8.0 [6.0 - 10.0]
27
Nghe An
1528
21.7 [18.6 - 24.9]
32.9 [28.5 - 37.3]
8.2 [6.6 - 9.8]
28
Ha Tinh
1428
21.8 [18.1 - 25.5]
34.7 [28.5 - 40.9]
10.0 [7.2 - 13.2]
29
Quang Binh
1528
23.6 [20.2 - 27.0]
35.2 [31.4 - 39.0]
7.2 [6.0 - 8.4]
30
Quang Tri
1492
19.5 [16.0 - 23.0]
32.9 [28.5 - 37.3]
7.1 [5.5 - 8.7]
117
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Province
Stunting
Wasting
[95%CI]
[95%CI]
[95%CI]
31
Thua Thien Hue
1512
16.6 [13.0 - 20.2]
29.5 [26.0 - 33.0]
7.2 [5.3 - 9.1]
32
Da Nang
1422
7.8 [6.4 - 9.2]
19.9 [18.1 - 21.7]
4.9 [3.7 - 6.1]
33
Quang Nam
1526
18.2 [16.0 - 20.4]
32.8 [30.0 - 35.6]
6.8 [5.6 - 8.1]
34
Quang Ngai
1522
19.2 [15.2 - 23.2]
29.8 [25.4 - 34.2]
6.9 [5.1 - 8.7]
35
Binh Dinh
1520
19.3 [16.8 - 21.8]
29.7 [24.6 - 34.8]
7.0 [5.4 - 8.6]
36
Phu Yen
1522
19.1 [15.3 - 22.9]
31.8 [28.0 - 35.6]
6.8 [5.4 - 8.2]
37
Khanh Hoa
1516
15.7 [10.2 - 21.2]
27.2 [23.2 - 31.2]
8.2 [5.5 - 10.9]
38
Ninh Thuan
1528
23.5 [18.9 - 28.1]
31.6 [26.1 - 37.1]
8.4 [6.4 - 10.4]
39
Binh Thuan
1346
19.7 [17.2 - 22.2]
32.1 [27.6 - 36.6]
6.8 [5.2 - 8.4]
Central highlands
7207
24.7 [24.1-25.3]
35.2 [34.6-35.8]
8.1 [7.1-9.1]
40
Kon Tum
1518
28.3 [23.9 - 32.7]
41.6 [35.0 - 48.2]
9.2 [6.2 - 12.2]
41
Gia Lai
1523
26.3 [21.2 - 31.4]
36.2 [30.6 - 41.8]
9.3 [7.2 -11.4]
42
Dak Lak
1528
27.0 [23.1 - 30.9]
36.9 [32.5 - 41.3]
8.2 [6.2 - 10.2]
43
Dac Nong
1112
26.9 [24.2 - 29.6]
38.0 [35.1 - 40.9]
7.0 [5.4 - 8.6]
44
Lam Dong
1526
16.5 [14.1 - 18.9]
27.0 [23.0 - 31.0]
6.5 [5.3 - 7.7]
8929
10.7 [9.9-11.5]
19.2 [18.5-19.7]
8.1 [7.3-8.9]
Southeast
APPENDIX B
Underweight (%)
N
45
Binh Phuoc
1502
19.9 [16.8 - 23.0]
33.0 [28.9 - 37.1]
8.6 [6.4 - 10.9]
46
Tay Ninh
1512
17.2 [15.4 - 19.0]
28.5 [25.9 - 31.1]
6.6 [4.8 - 8.4]
47
Binh Duong
1508
12.9 [11.3 - 14.5]
26.5 [24.4 - 28.6]
6.2 [4.6 - 7.8]
48
Dong Nai
1442
12.4 [9.3 - 15.6]
30.8 [26.4 - 35.2]
6.8 [5.2 - 8.4]
49
Ba Ria Vung Tau
1465
12.0 [10.0 - 14.0]
25.7 [23.1 - 28.3]
7.0 [6.0 - 8.0]
50
Ho Chi Minh
1500
6.8 [5.1 - 8.5]
7.8 [5.7 - 9.9]
3.3 [2.3 - 4.4]
Mekong river delta
19.437
16.8 [16.1-17.5]
28.2 [27.4-29.0]
11.1 [10.3-12.0]
51
Long An
1546
14.4 [12.5 - 16.3]
24.5 [22.0 - 27.0]
6.6 [5.5 - 7.7]
52
Tien Giang
1500
15.6 [13.3 - 17.9]
28.1 [25.9 - 30.3]
9.5 [6.2 - 12.8]
53
Ben Tre
1517
16.3 [14.3 - 18.3]
26.9 [24.5 - 29.3]
6.4 [5.2 - 7.6]
54
Tra Vinh
1459
19.3 [17.4 - 21.2]
28.9 [25.8 - 31.9]
7.6 [5.8 - 9.4]
55
Vinh Long
1510
18.8 [16.6 - 21.0]
28.9 [26.6 - 31.2]
7.2 [5.8 - 8.6]
56
Dong Thap
1540
17.3 [14.7 - 19.9]
29.8 [25.3 - 34.3]
7.5 [6.1 - 8.9]
57
An Giang
1528
17.0 [13.9 - 20.2]
28.7 [24.3 - 33.1]
7.1 [5.5 - 8.7]
58
Kien Giang
1567
17.3 [13.9 - 20.7]
26.9 [23.1 - 30.7]
6.5 [4.9 - 8.1]
59
Can Tho
1468
13.9 [11.5 - 16.3]
26.4 [22.4 - 30.4]
6.2 [5.0 - 7.4]
60
Hau Giang
1456
16.4 [14.9 - 17.9]
31.0 [28.4 - 33.6]
7.4 [5.7 - 9.1]
61
Soc Trang
1420
18.3 [15.5 - 21.1]
29.9 [26.6 - 33.2]
9.1 [6.2 - 12.0]
62
Bac Lieu
1448
17.0 [15.0 - 19.0]
28.8 [26.2 - 31.4]
7.5 [6.5 - 8.5]
63
Ca Mau
1478
17.2 [14.8 - 19.6]
28.6 [24.6 - 32.6]
7.8 [6.6 - 9.0]
118
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B3. PREVALENCE OF UNDERWEIGHT IN CHILDREN UNDER 60 MONTHS
OLD BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Age group (mo.)
Boy
Girl
Total
0-5
7
6.5
6.7
6-11
11
8.8
9.9
12-17
15.4
14.7
15
18-23
20.7
18.4
19.5
24-29
18.9
18.7
18.8
30-35
20.8
19.8
20.3
36-41
22.9
22.3
22.6
42-47
22.8 22.6 22.7
48-53
22.8
22.7
22.7
54-59
25.9
26.4
26.2
Total
18.4
16.6
17.5
Table B4. MEAN WEIGHT FOR AGE Z-SCORE IN CHIDLREN UNDER 5 BY SEX AND
AGE GROUP
Weight-for-age Z-score
Age
group
(mo)
6-11
12-17
18-23
24-29
30-35
36-41
42-47
48-53
54-59
Total
Mean
[95% CI t]
-0.47
-0.68, -0.26
-0.61
-0.81, -0.40
-0.59
-0.8, -0.38
-0.91
-1.16, -0.67
-0.71
-1.02, -0.40
-1.21
-1.42, -1.00
-1.22
-1.49, -0.94
-0.88
-1.07, -0.68
-0.92
-1.27, -0.58
-1.12
-1.35, -0.89
-0.84
-0.92, -0.76
Girl
SD
Number
1.03
3525
1.17
6865
1.24
5753
1.32
6625
1.42
5172
1.3
4929
1.25
4368
1.04
3907
1.38
3384
1.36
2946
1.27
47474
Mean
[95% CI t]
-0.39
-0.65, -0.14
-0.39
-0.58, -0.20
-0.57
-0.81, -0.33
-0.66
-0.92, -0.4
-0.9
-1.09, -0.70
-0.98
-1.18, -0.79
-0.57
-1.09, -0.05
-1.05
-1.26, -0.83
-1.33
-1.56, -1.09
-1.24
-1.5, -0.98
-0.79
-0.89, -0.70
Total
SD
Number
1.07
3254
1.13
6743
1.3
5867
1.34
6165
1
5126
1.18
4897
1.41
4178
1.08
3957
1.31
3469
1.14
3126
1.24
46782
Mean
[95% CI t]
-0.44
-0.6, -0.28
-0.5
-0.65, -0.36
-0.58
-0.75, -0.42
-0.79
-0.98, -0.61
-0.81
-1.00, -0.62
-1.1
-1.25, -0.96
-0.91
-1.13, -0.68
-0.96
-1.11, -0.81
-1.12
-1.35, -0.89
-1.19
-1.36, -1.01
-0.82
-0.89, -0.75
SD
Number
1.05
6779
1.15
13608
1.27
11620
1.34
12790
1.2
10298
1.25
9826
1.37
8546
1.06
7864
1.37
6853
1.24
6072
1.26
94256
119
APPENDIX B
0-5
Boy
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B5. PREVALENCE OF UNDERNUTRITION IN CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY ETHNICITY
WAZ
HAZ
WHZ
<-2 Z
<-2 Z
<-2 Z
Kinh
14.3
23.2
6.9
Tay
21.3
30.8
7.2
H'mong
33.9
55.1
7.2
Ede
28.6
36.4
8.8
Thai
28.4
40.6
11
Muong
16.4
25.8
9
27
38.5
10
Dao
27.3
46.2
12.8
Kho me
27.2
31.6
6.5
Bana
28.9
52.6
12
Gia-rai
27.6
55.5
8.2
Others
24.4
41.7
7.9
Ethnic group
APPENDIX B
Nung
Table B6. THE PREVALENCE OF UNDERNUTRITION IN CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE
WAZ
HAZ
WHZ
<-2 Z
<-2 Z
<-2 Z
Poor
14.3
23.2
6.9
Marginal poor
21.3
30.8
7.2
Middle
33.9
55.1
7.2
Marginal rich
28.6
36.4
8.8
Rich
28.4
40.6
11
Wealth index quintile
120
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B7. PREVALENCE OF SEVERE UNDERWEIGHT (WAZ <-3)
BY SEX AND WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE
WAZ< -3 Z
Wealth index quintile
% [95% CI]
Poor Marginal poor
6.7 [4.87; 9.13]
Middle Marginal rich
4.4 [2.66; 7.07]
Rich Poor
3.6 [1.87; 6.7]
Marginal poor Middle
2.3 [1.42; 3.86]
Marginal rich
1.1 [0.61; 2.12]
Table B8. MEAN WAZ, HAZ AND WHZ Z-SCORE BY WEALTH INDEX QUINTILE
Mean WAZ
Mean HAZ
Mean WHZ
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
Mức sống theo Quintile
-1.26 [-1.36; -1.15]
-1.25 [-1.46; -1.05]
-1.25 [-1.46; -1.05]
Middle Marginal rich
-1.08 [-1.2; -0.97]
-1.11 [-1.32; -0.9]
-0.66 [-0.8; -0.52]
Rich Poor
-1.01 [-1.14; -0.89]
-1.14 [-1.34; -0.93]
-0.55 [-0.72; -0.39]
Marginal poor Middle
-0.74 [-0.88; -0.61]
-0.67 [-0.85; -0.5]
-0.51 [-0.69; -0.33]
Marginal rich
-0.39 [-0.51; -0.27]
-0.5 [-0.62; -0.38]
-0.5 [-0.62; -0.38]
121
APPENDIX B
Poor Marginal poor
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B9. PREVALENCE OF UNDERNUTRITION (Z-SCORE <-2) AND SEVERE
UNDERNUTRITION (Z-SCORE <-3) IN CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
WAZ
HAZ
WHZ
Ecological region
<-3 Z
<-2 Z
<-3 Z
<-2 Z
<-3 Z
Red river delta
14.6
1.4
25.5
1.7
6.1.
3
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
22.1
2.4
33.7
4.4
7.4
7.5
Northern central and
coastal area
19.8
2.2
31.4
3.7
7.6
6.5
Central highlands
24.7
4.1
35.2
6.8
8.1
7.2
Southeast
10.7
1.2
19.2
2.1
5.2
2.7
Mekong river delta
16.8
2.3
28.2
3.9
7.4
4.7
APPENDIX B
<-2 Z
Table B10. MEAN NUTRITION Z-SCORE BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
Ecological region
Red river delta
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
Northern central and coastal area
Central highlands
Southeast
Mekong river delta
122
WAZ
HAZ
WHZ
Mean
Mean
Mean
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
-0.7 [-0.82; -0.57]
-0.75 [-0.88; -0.62]
-0.38 [-0.52; -0.23]
-1.11 [-1.33; -0.89]
-1.18 [-1.45; -0.92]
-0.63 [-0.87; -0.38]
-0.98 [-1.1; -0.86]
-1.03 [-1.26; -0.8]
-0.63 [-0.81; -0.44]
-1.15 [-1.27; -1.04]
-1.18 [-1.49; -0.86]
-0.67 [-0.83; -0.5]
-0.5 [-0.71; -0.29]
-0.6 [-0.79; -0.42]
-0.17 [-0.45; 0.11]
-0.89 [-1; -0.77]
-0.84 [-0.99; -0.69]
-0.59 [-0.73; -0.45]
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B11. PREVALENCE OF UNDERNUTRITION (Z-SCORE <-2) AND SEVERE
UNDERNUTRITION (Z-SCORE <-3) IN CHILDREN UNDER 5 BY
URBAN/RURAL, MATERNAL HEIGHT AND MATERNAL BMI
WAZ
Characteristic
<-2 Z
HAZ
<-3Z
<-2 Z
[95% CI]
WHZ
<-3 Z
<-2 Z
[95% CI]
<-3 Z
[95% CI]
Region
0.2
Large city
5.5
4.1
8.9
0.03, 1.52
15.6
11.6
15
8.0, 16.4
2.3
17.8
2.79, 6.67
11.6
30.7
2.7, 4.65
Non-poor
commune
4.3
10
2.79, 6.67
3.6
24.8
1.07, 9.60
4.3
24.2
1.4, 2.8
Poor commune
5
1.70, 9.60
2.1
Small city
4.1
8.0, 16.4
8.4
28.4
1.60, 3.0
8.4
12
6.70, 10.60
6.07, 10.60
26.3
4.7
APPENDIX B
Maternal height
38.2
<145 cm
18.91, 35.22
15.3
2.33, 9.27 30.2, 46.9
3.1
21.4
>=145 cm
13.8, 17.02
2.47, 3.9 19.4, 23.5
Maternal BMI
23.2
5.4
19.5, 27.4
3.71, 7.92
13.4
2.4
32.6
11.3
15.9
11.3
2
< 18.5 Kg/m
29.5,35.7 10.20, 15.20 12.74, 19.57 8.20, 15.20
20.6
7.8
11.4
6.8
1.81, 3.23 18.4, 22.9
6.4, 9.4
9.81, 13.23
5.4,9.4
> =18.5 Kg/m2
11.69, 15.35
123
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B12. MEAN NUTRITION Z-SCORE IN CHILDREN UNDER 5 BY
URBAN/RURAL, MATERNAL HEIGHT AND MATERNAL BMI
Characteristic
WAZ
HAZ
WHZ
Mean
Mean
Mean
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
Region
-0.31
-0.3
-0.17
-0.63, 0.01
-0.51, -0.1
-0.54, 0.21
-0.67
-0.69
-0.27
-0.83, -0.50
-1.05, -0.33
-0.46, -0.09
-0.92
-1.01
-0.57
-1.00, -0.85
-1.27, -1.75
-0.68, -0.47
-0.77
-0.94
-0.53
-0.84, -0.7
-1.05, -0.83
-0.77, -0.30
-1.33
-1.47
-1.52, -1.15
-1.74, -1.19
-0.79
-0.82
-0.86, -0.72
-0.9, -0.73
-1.13
-1.21
-1.16
-1.25, -1.01
-1.84, -0.94
-1.26, -1.0
-0.71
-0.76
-0.74
-0.80, -0.62
-0.85, -0.67
-0.85, -0.53
Large city
Small city
Poor commune
APPENDIX B
Non-poor commune
Maternal height
<145 cm
>=145 cm
Maternal BMI
2
< 18.5 Kg/m
> =18.5 Kg/m2
124
125
Diversified (upper 1/3)
Normal
No diversified (lower 1/3)
Household food diversification
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary education
No school/illiterate
Maternal education
1.45, 4.85
2.7
16.3
13.33, 19.82
1.21, 4.47
2.3
14.5
11.12, 18.69
3.06, 6.6
4.5
17.21, 25.45
21
1.01, 4.1
2
11.7
8.39, 16.12
1.04, 4.75
2.2
17.6
13.93, 22.08
3.28, 8.49
5.3
23.8
19.34, 28.93
3.21, 9.14
14.58, 24.96
5.5
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
19.2
%
<-3 Z
%
<-2 Z
9795
8130
8865
6855
9225
5565
3450
Number
APPENDIX B
Characteristic
Boy
6.46, 12.7
9.1
11.49, 18.51
14.7
15.8, 23.75
19.5
4.1, 9.91
6.4
11.38, 19.2
14.9
12, 21.71
16.3
18.68, 30.83
24.2
[95% CI]
%
<-2 Z
0.8, 2.94
1.5
1.96, 6.9
3.7
3.27, 6.58
4.7
0.56, 2.73
1.2
2.27, 6.66
3.9
1.31, 4.79
2.5
3.18, 8.83
5.3
[95% CI]
%
<-3 Z
Girl
8760
7530
8445
6270
9090
4950
3060
Number
10.72, 15.44
12.9
12.03, 17.55
14.6
17.88, 22.89
20.3
7.1, 11.80
9.2
13.66, 19.26
16.3
16.86, 24.06
20.2
17.84, 25.89
21.6
[95% CI]
%
<-2 Z
1.34, 3.36
2.1
1.93, 4.62
3
3.45, 6.05
4.6
0.98, 2.81
1.7
2.01, 4.65
3.1
2.66, 5.93
4
3.73, 7.77
5.4
[95% CI]
%
<-3 Z
Total
18555
15660
17310
13125
18315
10515
6510
Number
Table B13. PREVALENCE OF UNDERWEIGHT (WAZ <-2) AND SEVERE UNDERWEIGHT (WAZ <-3) OF CHILDREN UNDER 5 BY SEX,
MATERNAL EDUCATION AND HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B14. MEAN WEIGHT-FOR-AGE Z-SCORE OF CHILDREN UNDER 5 BY SEX,
MATERNAL EDUCATION AND HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION
WAZ
Boy
Characteristic
Mean
Girl
SD Number
[95% CI]
Mean
Total
SD Number
[95% CI]
Mean
SD Number
[95% CI]
Maternal education
No school/illiterate
Primary school
Middle school
High school or higher
-1.12
-1.29, -0.95
-1.14
-1.29, -0.99
-0.78
-0.92, -0.63
-0.57
-0.72, -0.41
1.36
3450
1.24
5565
1.22
9225
1.21
6855
1.35
8865
1.22
8130
1.21
9795
-1.15
-1.36, -0.95
-0.93
-1.09, -0.77
-0.85
-1.01, -0.69
-0.39
-0.54, -0.24
1.48
3060
1.18
4950
1.2
9090
1.09
6270
1.39
8445
1.2
7530
1.09
8760
-1.14
-1.27, -1
-1.04
-1.16, -0.92
-0.81
-0.93, -0.7
-0.48
-0.6, -0.37
1.42
6510
1.21
10515
1.21
18315
1.16
13125
1.37
17310
1.21
15660
1.15
18555
Household food diversification
No diversified
(lower 1/3)
Normal
APPENDIX B
Diversified
(upper 1/3)
-1.04
-1.17, -0.91
-0.8
-0.92, -0.67
-0.71
-0.87, -0.55
-0.93
-1.05, -0.81
-0.92
-1.07, -0.77
-0.56
-0.69, -0.42
-0.99
-1.07, -0.9
-0.86
-0.96, -0.75
-0.64
-0.76, -0.52
Table B15. PREVALENCE OF STUNTING IN CHILDREN UNDER 5 BY
SEX AND AGE GROUP
126
Age group (mo)
Boy
Girl
Total
0-5
12
11.2
11.6
6-11
22.6
22.2
22.4
12-17
29.7
27.9
28.8
18-23
29.8
28.9
29.4
24-29
32.4
32
32.2
30-35
32.5
32.1
32.3
36-41
32.4
32.2
32.3
42-47
32.9
31.8
32.4
48-53
32.5
31.2
31.9
54-59
33.1
32.7
32.9
Total
31.5
27.1
29.3
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B16: MEAN HEIGHT-FOR-AGE SCORE BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Boy
Age group
(month)
Girl
Mean
Mean
SD
SD
Number
[95% CI ]
-0.22
3767
-0.59, 0.15
3246
7334
6723
-0.39, 0.32
-0.63, -0.16
-0.42
-0.75
-0.57
1.75
6148
1.78
5852
-0.73, -0.11
-1.07, -0.42
-0.79, -0.35
-1.08
-0.83
-0.96
18-23
1.81
7080
1.89
6148
-1.39, -0.78
-1.15, -0.52
-1.19, -0.73
-0.99
-1.12
-1.06
24-29
1.86
5526
-1.34, -0.65
4668
-1.6, -1.04
-1.58, -0.89
-1.56, -0.74
-1.59, -1.1
8835
1.5
8123
1.72
7076
3118
1.59
6266
1.68
97391
-1.45, -0.96
-0.86
1.67
-0.91, -0.68
1.4
-1.21
1.58
50730
10155
-1.44, -0.9
-0.8
1.7
-1.03, -0.81
3461
-1.45, -0.72
-0.92
1.78
-1.17
1.67
3148
10637
-1.31, -0.86
-1.09
1.55
TOTAL
3947
-1.5, -0.87
-1.35
1.58
-1.08
1.55
3615
13228
-1.31, -0.88
-1.19
1.76
54-59
4168
-1.21, -0.65
-1.15
1.85
-1.09
1.38
4176
12000
-1.25, -0.79
-0.93
1.44
48-53
4887
-1.25, -0.47
-1.23
1.77
-1.02
1.62
-0.86
1.37
14056
-1.27, -0.86
-1.27, -0.74
-1.32
1.7
46661
-0.94, -0.78
127
APPENDIX B
5268
-1.39, -0.68
42-47
5112
-1
1.91
36-41
1.33
-1.32, -0.92
-1.03
30-35
7013
-0.4
1.72
-0.99, -0.48
12-17
1.62
-0.45, 0.1
-0.04
1.61
Number
-0.18
1.9
-0.59, 0.4
-0.74
SD
[95% CI ]
-0.09
1.47
6-11
Mean
Number
[95% CI ]
0-5
Total
128
Diversified (upper 1/3)
Normal
No diversified (lower 1/3)
Household food diversification
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Maternal education
Characteristic
6.4, 8.6
7.5
22
19.9, 24.1
8.0, 11.2
9.6
28.4
26.2, 30.6
10.5, 14.7
12.6
32.1, 36.3
34.2
7.1, 11.3
9.2
20.1
17.8, 23.4
7.5,11.7
9.6
24.3
21.8, 26.8
8.8, 13.0
10.9
32.6
29.5, 35.7
9.5, 13.5
36.3,42.5
11.5
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
39.4
%
< -3 Z
%
< -2 Z
Boy
9795
8130
8865
6855
9225
5565
3450
Number
19.0, 24.4
22.2
26.3, 29.2
27.9
31.9, 34.9
33.4
18.2, 22.2
20.2
20.3, 24.5
22.4
31.1, 34.3
33.2
35.9, 40.7
37.8
[95% CI]
%
< -2 Z
4.7, 6.9
5.8
6.1, 12.1
9.1
6.5, 10.9
8.6
5.5, 7.3
6.4
6.6, 8.8
7.7
6.4, 8.2
7.3
10 12.2
11.1
[95% CI]
%
< -3 Z
Girl
8760
7530
8445
6270
9090
4950
3060
Number
18.9, 24.3
22.1
22.5, 25.5
24
31.5, 35.7
33.6
18.0, 22.2
20.1
21.2, 25.4
23.3
29.8, 36.0
32.9
35.5, 41.7
38.6
[95% CI]
%
< -2 Z
5.8, 7.6
6.7
8.3, 10.5
9.4
9.5, 11.7
10.6
6.7, 9.1
7.9
6.6, 9.8
8.7
7.5, 11.5
9.5
9.3, 13.3
11.3
[95% CI]
%
< -3 Z
Total
Table B17. PREVALENCE OF STUNTING (HAZ <-2) AND SEVERE STUNTING (HAZ<-3) BY SEX,
MATERNAL EDUCATION AND HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION
APPENDIX B
18555
15660
17310
13125
18315
10515
6510
Number
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Diversified (upper 1/3)
Normal
No diversified (lower 1/3)
Household food diversification
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Maternal education
-1.08, -0.73
-1.16, -0.74
-0.95
9795
-0.91
1.68
-1.03, -0.64
-1.37, -0.96
8130
-0.84
2.02
-0.5
-1.16
8865
-0.68, -0.31
1.61
-0.68, -0.31
-0.83, -0.37
-0.6
-0.83, -0.37
-0.5
6855
-0.6
1.61
-0.92, -0.5
-1.09, -0.75
-0.71
9225
-0.92
1.59
-1.2, -0.78
5565
-1.43, -0.95
1.67
-0.99
-1.29
Mean HAZ
[95% CI]
-1.19
3450
n
-1.52, -1.06
2.13
SD
-1.39, -0.84
-1.11
Mean HAZ
[95% CI]
APPENDIX B
Characteristic
Boy
1.61
1.96
1.45
1.45
1.71
1.65
1.75
SD
Girl
8760
7530
8445
6270
9090
4950
3060
n
-1.07, -0.78
-0.93
-1.15, -0.85
-1
-0.7, -0.4
-0.55
-0.7, -0.4
-0.55
-0.96, -0.68
-0.82
-1.27, -0.92
-1.1
-1.38, -1.02
-1.2
Mean HAZ
[95% CI]
1.65
2
1.54
1.54
1.66
1.66
1.97
SD
Total
Table B18. MEAN HAZ-SCORE BY SEX, MATERNAL EDUCATION AND HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION
18555
15660
17310
13125
18315
10515
6510
n
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
129
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B19. PREVALENCE OF WASTING IN CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Boy
Girl
Total
WHZ <-2 Z
WHZ <-2 Z
WHZ<-2 Z
0-5
4.5
4
4.3
6-11
5.8
5.7
5.7
17-35
7.3
7.8
7.5
36-41
6.7
6.5
6.6
42-47
7.2
7
7.1
48-53
7.6
7.6
7.6
54-59
7.1
7.4
6.8
Total
7.3
6.9
7.1
Age group (mo)
APPENDIX B
Table B20. MEAN WHZ-SCORE BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Boy
Age group
(month)
Girl
Mean
Mean
SD
Number
[95% CI]
3767
-0.63, 0.14
7334
3246
6723
-0.71, -0.23
-0.51
-0.39
-0.46
1.56
6148
7080
-0.97, -0.32
5526
1.65
12000
6148
1.63
13228
1.33
10637
-0.69, -0.23
-0.4
1.14
-0.64, -0.2
14056
-0.46
1.61
-0.42
1.56
1.57
-0.69, -0.22
-0.56, 0.05
-0.37
-0.7, -0.03
5852
-0.26
1.62
24-29
1.74
-0.74, -0.04
-0.65
18-23
7013
-0.47
1.48
-0.72, -0.15
-0.79, -0.24
1.65
-0.57, -0.01
-0.82, -0.19
12-17
Number
-0.29
1.81
-0.43
1.65
SD
[95% CI]
-0.76, 0.03
-0.51
130
Number
-0.36
1.55
6-11
Mean
SD
[95% CI]
-0.24
0-5
Total
5112
-0.6, -0.19
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Boy
Age group
(month)
Girl
Mean
Mean
SD
Number
5268
-1.05, -0.51
4887
4668
-1.02, -0.36
4168
4176
3947
-0.89, -0.36
-0.65, -0.21
-0.4
-0.78
-0.59
1.47
3615
-0.74, -0.07
3148
-0.74, -0.16
8123
1.53
7076
1.52
6266
1.55
97391
-0.66
1.32
3118
-0.87, -0.45
-0.45
1.58
1.38
-0.8, -0.37
-1.11, -0.56
-0.48
-0.59, -0.38
3461
-0.83
1.73
TOTAL
1.56
-1.05, -0.51
-0.45
54-59
8835
-0.43
1.35
-0.55, 0.06
48-53
1.55
-0.56, -0.14
-0.62
1.37
10155
-0.35
1.56
-0.48, 0.48
-0.24
1.66
-0.9, -0.51
0
1.46
Number
-0.7
1.6
-0.88, -0.35
-0.69
SD
[95% CI]
-0.62
1.7
42-47
SD
[95% CI]
-0.78
36-41
Mean
Number
[95% CI]
30-35
Total
50730
-0.47
1.53
-0.57, -0.33
46661
-0.55, -0.38
APPENDIX B
131
132
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Maternal education
Characteristic
%
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
2.47, 6.78
4.1
12.6
9.27, 16.9
2.34, 5.51
3.6
13.3
9.81, 17.66
4.94, 12.28
7.9
17.6
13.2, 22.99
3.45, 9.52
5.8
9.35, 18.16
13.1
<-3 Z
<-2 Z
Boy
6855
9225
5565
3450
n
13
4.68, 10.08
6.9
12.41, 21.21
16.3
6.63, 14.97
10.1
9.37, 17.81
[95% CI]
%
<-2 Z
%
<-3 Z
5.4
1.2, 4.7
2.4
4.23, 10.31
6.6
2.1, 7.09
3.9
3.16, 9.2
[95% CI]
Girl
6270
9090
4950
3060
n
13.1
7.72, 12.51
9.9
12.1, 17.91
14.8
10.83, 17.88
14
10.3, 16.48
[95% CI]
%
<-2 Z
5.6
2.15, 5
3.3
3.68, 7.06
5.1
4, 8.82
6
3.83, 8.16
[95% CI]
%
<-3 Z
Total
13125
18315
10515
6510
n
Table B21. PREVALENCE OF WASTING (WHZ <-2) AND SEVERE WASTING (WHZ<-3) BY SEX AND MATERNAL EDUCATION
APPENDIX B
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B22. MEAN WHZ-SCORE BY SEX AND MATERNAL EDUCATION
Boy
Characteristic
Girl
Mean
Total
Mean
SD
n
[95% CI]
Mean
SD
n
SD
[95% CI]
n
[95% CI]
Maternal education
-0.7
No school
-0.53
1.65 3450
-0.89, -0.5
-0.77, -0.28
-0.73
Primary school
-0.97, -0.5
-0.62
1.51 4950
-0.67, -0.32
-0.38
1.58 10515
-0.78, -0.46
-0.6
1.56 9225
-0.55, -0.2
High school or
higher
1.76 6510
-0.78, -0.45
-0.49
1.63 5565
Middle school
-0.62
1.87 3060
-0.49
1.55 9090
-0.82, -0.39
-0.34
1.56 18315
-0.63, -0.35
-0.15
1.5 6855
-0.57, -0.11
-0.25
1.31 6270
-0.33, 0.03
1.41 13125
-0.42, -0.08
Table B23. TREND OF HIGHT GROWTH FROM 1975 TO PRESENT
VBC
NIN
Rural
NSC
1975
1985
1994
2000
2009
1994
2000
2009
6
106.5
103.6
106.3
109.3
109.8
109.7
113.1
110.3
7
110.9
109.3
111.6
115
117.6
114.7
118.7
119.2
8
116.1
113.3
116.6
119.4
122.6
120.3
122.9
124.6
9
118.8
118.2
121.1
124
126.2
124.3
126.5
128.4
10
121.5
122.1
125.2
128.4
130.6
128.1
132.4
134
11
126.9
126
128.4
132.4
134.3
133.2
135.9
137
12
130.9
129.9
134
136.9
139.9
135.1
142.3
139.8
13
133.9
133.6
138.4
141.1
145.3
145.9
145.7
146
14
137.6
137
144.7
148.6
151
148.6
154
155
6
104.8
102.1
105.6
108.4
109.5
110.1
118.8
115.9
7
110.2
108
111.2
114
116.7
114.2
118.7
120
8
115.5
112.8
116.2
119.3
122.4
119.3
122.4
123.6
9
117.4
117.6
120.9
123.6
125.8
123.5
127.6
131.2
10
122.1
121.5
124.9
129
131.8
130.1
133.3
135.7
11
126.3
125.6
130.3
134.2
136.8
133.6
139.6
145.9
12
130.5
129.8
135.9
138.6
141.9
143.7
142.7
145.3
13
135
134.5
140.6
143.4
146.1
145.7
145.2
147.7
14
138.9
138.5
144.6
147
149.9
148.4
149.3
150.1
Characteristic
Sex
Girl
NIN
NSC
NIN
Age
VBC: Vietnam Biological Constants; NIN: National Institute of Nutrition; NSC: National Scientific Committee
133
APPENDIX B
Boy
NIN
Urban
NIN
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B24. TREND OF WEIGHT GROWTH FROM 1975 TO PRESENT
Rural
Characteristic
Sex
APPENDIX B
Boy
Girl
134
Urban
VBC
NIN
NSC
NIN
NIN
NSC
NIN
NIN
1975
1985
1994
2000
2009
1994
2000
2009
6
15.7
15.3
16.3
16.9
17.8
17.2
19.1
19.3
7
16.7
16.9
17.8
18.7
20.2
18.8
21.9
22.4
8
18.5
18.3
19.6
20.5
22.5
30.3
23
25.2
9
20.3
20.1
21.2
22.5
24.4
22.4
24.7
26.5
10
21.5
21.7
23.2
24.1
27.1
24
28.3
29.6
11
24
23.6
24.5
26.6
29.2
27.2
29.5
29.4
12
25.5
25.3
27.3
29.3
32.4
27.8
33.8
32.6
13
27.7
27.1
30.5
32.7
35.2
34.9
37
39.3
14
29.8
29.2
34.9
37.1
39.7
36.9
41.2
43.8
6
15.1
14.9
15.7
16.6
17.1
16.6
17.6
20.4
7
17.1
16.2
17.1
17.9
19.6
18
19.4
23.4
8
18.9
17.8
19
19.8
23.1
19.9
21.7
25.5
9
19.7
19.3
20.6
22.2
23.7
22.2
24.7
28.9
10
21.6
21.2
22.6
24
26.4
25.2
28.1
31.2
11
23.5
22.7
25.8
27.3
29.4
27.5
32.2
35.1
12
25.7
24.9
28.6
30.3
32.9
32.2
33.1
38
13
28.1
27.3
32.2
34.1
36
35.6
37.6
36.4
14
30.7
30.1
35.8
37.9
39.5
39.5
39.4
38.1
Age
135
Total
17-19
14-16
11-13
8-10
5-7
Age group 2.63, 3.93
3.2
10.2
8.83, 11.73
0.04, 0.77
0.2
1.8
0.78, 3.94
0.1, 1.3
0.4
2.8
1.77, 4.48
1.33, 3.88
2.3
10.9
8.42, 13.9
3.57, 6.86
5
15.3
12.23, 19.03
6.58, 11.46
17.37, 25.66
8.7
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
21.2
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
0.8, 1.66
1.2
0.02, 0.85
0.1
0.01, 0.32
0.05
0.09, 2.59
0.5
0.73, 2.55
1.4
2.41, 6.12
3.9
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
4680
1005
987
858
899
931
n
12
5.72, 8.05
6.8
0.4, 4.46
1.3
1, 3.95
2
4.2, 8.56
6
9.77, 16.06
12.6
9.36, 15.19
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
APPENDIX B
Boy
4
1.31, 2.42
1.8
0
0.03, 0.5
0.1
0.27, 1.86
0.7
2.66, 6.15
4.1
2.73, 5.78
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Girl
0.15, 0.45
0.3
0
0
0
0.22, 1.62
0.6
0.37, 1.27
0.7
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
4871
917
1074
916
957
1008
n
7.45, 9.6
8.5
0.82, 2.97
1.6
1.6, 3.57
2.4
6.62, 10.63
8.4
11.85, 16.23
13.9
13.69, 19.77
16.5
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
2.07, 2.99
2.5
0.02, 0.4
0.1
0.09, 0.65
0.2
0.92, 2.33
1.5
3.39, 5.94
4.5
4.9, 7.97
6.3
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Total
0.51, 0.95
0.7
0.01, 0.45
0.1
0, 0.15
0.02
0.04, 1.25
0.2
0.57, 1.64
1
1.47, 3.32
2.2
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
n
9551
1921
2061
1774
1856
1938
Table B25. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) BY AGE GROUP IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
136
Others
Bana
Kho me
Dao
Nung
Muong
Thai
H’mong
Tay
Kinh
Ethnic group
2.7
1.09, 6.5
5.9
2.54, 13.09
5.7
3.01, 10.61
0
7.1
3.74, 12.96
10.1
5.82, 16.83
13.8
7.35, 24.29
9.1
1.62, 13.33
1.9
0.23, 13.5
0
4.18, 22.01
2.2
0.27, 15.36
4.2
2.3
1.08, 4.63
10.3
5.74, 17.83
0.54, 26.16
4.8
10
1.5, 14.37
4.8
0
2.61, 4.1
8.9, 12.22
4.97, 16.14
3.3
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
10.5
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
Bé trai
0.41, 2.54
1.0
0
0.23, 13.5
1.9
0.87, 14.73
3.8
0
0
0.95, 6.59
2.5
0.67, 8.45
2.4
0.14, 7.06
1
0.71, 1.7
1.1
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
175
20
64
36
34
89
101
95
120
3946
n
4.94, 11.59
7.6
2.82, 32.01
10.5
0.59, 10.18
2.5
3.98, 25.69
10.7
1.52, 18.5
5.6
5.44, 32.14
14.2
1.73, 12.88
4.9
3.62, 13.51
7.1
2, 9.7
4.5
5.54, 8.11
6.7
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
0.64, 3.76
1.6
0.3, 13.22
2.1
0
1.67, 21.48
6.4
0.11, 5.05
0.8
3.1, 26.49
9.7
0.72, 8.23
2.5
0.79, 5.4
2.1
0.84, 5.16
2.1
1.12, 2.19
1.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Bé gái
0.03, 1.42
0.2
0.3, 13.22
2.1
0
1.67, 21.48
6.4
0
0.65, 7.5
2.2
0.19, 7.44
1.2
0.21, 4.57
1.0
0
0.07, 0.27
0.1
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
165
17
71
30
38
107
93
92
104
4155
n
5.9, 13.57
9
1.88, 22.8
7
0.78, 6.9
2.4
6.02, 17.06
10.3
1.69, 15.09
5.2
5.36, 24.11
11.8
5.68, 16.13
9.7
5.32, 13.73
8.6
3.41, 10.14
5.9
7.39, 9.84
8.5
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
1.02, 3.57
1.9
0.25, 1.56
0.6
0.14, 6.17
1
1
0.14, 6.17
0.13, 6.03
0.9
1.96, 11.87
4.9
0
0.34, 4.36
1.2
0.77, 4.62
1.9
0.66, 4.45
1.7
0.08, 3.82
0.5
0.41, 0.9
0.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
0.13, 6.03
0.9
2.57, 11.39
5.5
0.06, 2.8
0.4
1.63, 15.78
5.3
2.17, 7.86
4.2
1.92, 8.25
4
1.31, 4.42
2.4
1.94, 2.97
2.4
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Chung
n
340
38
135
66
72
196
194
186
224
8101
Table B26. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) BY ETHNICITY IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD
APPENDIX B
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
137
Total
Rich
Marginal rich
Middle
Marginal poor
Poor
Household
wealth
2.63, 3.93
3.2
10.2
8.83, 11.73
3.13, 6.5
4.5
15
11.76, 18.88
1.64, 4.85
2.8
10.6
7.3, 15.01
1.81, 4.43
2.8
9.5
6.41, 13.99
1.17, 3.71
2.1
5.9
4.36, 7.86
2.37, 5.26
6.82, 11.68
3.5
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
9
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
1
0.8, 1.66
1.2
0.59, 2.22
1.1
0.47, 3.53
1.3
0.75, 2.94
1.5
0.36, 1.62
0.8
0.59, 1.72
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
4680
1081
913
983
852
851
n
5.72, 8.05
6.8
7.11, 13.32
9.8
4.55, 9.92
6.8
3.6, 8.04
5.4
2.53, 6.09
3.9
5.29, 10.76
7.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
APPENDIX B
Boy
1.31, 2.42
1.8
0.51, 2.61
1.2
0.98, 3.09
1.7
0.97, 3.21
1.8
0.48, 1.51
0.9
1.93, 6.95
3.7
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Girl
0.15, 0.45
0.3
0.06, 0.61
0.2
0.03, 0.48
0.1
0.04, 0.57
0.1
0.1, 0.73
0.3
0.22, 1.67
0.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
4871
1141
995
910
958
867
n
7.45, 9.6
8.5
10.01, 15.1
12.3
6.78, 10.8
8.6
5.3, 10.69
7.6
3.77, 6.22
4.9
6.58, 10.35
8.3
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
2.07, 2.99
2.5
2, 3.88
2.8
1.51, 3.4
2.3
1.64, 3.3
2.3
0.92, 2.24
1.4
2.51, 5.19
3.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+2 Z
Total
0.51, 0.95
0.7
0.36, 1.18
0.7
0.27, 1.74
0.7
0.45, 1.58
0.8
0.28, 0.91
0.5
0.49, 1.33
0.8
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age
z >+3 Z
Table B27. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) BY HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD
9551
2222
1908
1893
1810
1718
n
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
138
Mekong river delta
Southeast
Central highlands
Northern central and
coastal area
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
Red river delta
Ecological
region
2.37, 5.04
1.6
7.26, 11.83
4.7
1.3, 4.17
2.3
8.1
6, 10.95
3.56, 10.53
17.42, 36.22
6.2
3.5
9.3
25.7
2.79, 5.45
7.76, 12.22
0.73, 3.29
3.9
9.8
2.88, 7.51
1.57, 4.36
2.6
[95% CI]
6.2, 11.25
8.4
[95% CI]
0.55, 2.68
1.2
0.85, 6.82
2.4
0.26, 1.7
0.7
0.37, 2.26
0.9
1.05, 2.81
1.7
0.21, 1.73
0.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Boy
943
435
393
1249
687
973
n
4.99, 8.9
6.7
7.83, 21.72
13.3
2.77, 6.02
4.1
4.14, 8.6
6
4.85, 8.53
6.5
3.35, 7.69
5.1
[95% CI]
0.7, 2.35
1.3
0.44, 4.77
1.5
0.73, 3.16
1.5
1.22, 4.61
2.4
1.59, 3.6
2.4
0.73, 2.64
1.4
[95% CI]
0.02, 0.77
0.1
0.02, 0.83
0.1
0.18, 1.13
0.4
0.03, 1.31
0.2
0.46, 1.92
0.9
0.01, 0.48
0.1
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Girl
982
581
400
1267
638
1004
n
6, 9.09
7.4
12.41, 27.11
18.7
3.19, 6.04
4.4
6.13, 9.5
7.6
6.57, 10.12
8.2
5.24, 8.57
6.7
[95% CI]
2
1.18, 2.73
1.8
1.83, 6.54
3.5
0.92, 2.57
1.5
2.04, 4.18
2.9
2.4, 4.21
3.2
1.28, 3.11
[95% CI]
0.31, 1.36
0.7
0.42, 2.92
1.1
0.28, 1.12
0.6
0.25, 1.2
0.6
0.92, 1.96
1.3
0.13, 0.87
0.3
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Total
Table B28. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD
APPENDIX B
1925
1016
793
2516
1325
1977
n
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
139
Non-poor
commune
Poor commune
Total rural
Small city
Large city
Total urban
2.17, 5.94
2.4
1.86, 3.2
7.9
6.64, 9.28
3.6
8
5.27, 11.91
2.06, 3.29
2.6
7.9
6.77, 9.14
2.49, 6.55
4.1
11.4
8.6, 14.97
2.47, 12.78
5.7
34.5
22.41, 48.92
2.94, 7
4.6
[95% CI]
13.34, 24.36
18.2
[95% CI]
0.41, 1.24
0.7
0.69, 2.56
1.3
0.51, 1.26
0.8
0.74, 3.11
1.5
0.17, 3.5
0.8
0.68, 2.49
1.3
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
3130
497
3626
669
281
950
n
Girl
4.3, 6.48
5.3
3.88, 9.1
6
4.45, 6.47
5.4
6.04, 11.82
8.5
13.75, 30.65
21
9.46, 16.42
12.5
[95% CI]
1.1, 2.4
1.6
1.54, 5.18
2.8
1.27, 2.5
1.8
1.12, 5.91
2.6
0.48, 12.36
2.5
1.18, 5.53
2.6
[95% CI]
0.07, 0.41
0.2
0.24, 1.85
0.7
0.12, 0.46
0.2
0.14, 1.16
0.4
0
0.09, 0.79
0.3
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
APPENDIX B
Region
Boy
3283
470
3753
645
308
953
n
5.72, 7.47
6.5
5.1, 9.55
7
5.86, 7.43
6.6
7.89, 12.54
10
18.54, 38.5
27.4
11.82, 19.74
15.4
[95% CI]
1.58, 2.6
2
2.24, 4.63
3.2
1.78, 2.68
2.2
2.11, 5.26
3.3
1.88, 8.62
4.1
2.38, 5.3
3.6
[95% CI]
0.28, 0.69
0.4
0.59, 1.74
1
0.35, 0.74
0.5
0.52, 1.8
1
0.08, 1.74
0.4
0.44, 1.4
0.8
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Total
6412
967
7379
1314
589
1902
n
Table B29. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD BY URBAN/RURAL
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
140
High school or
higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Total rural
> 18.5 Kg/m2
< 18.5 Kg/m2
Maternal BMI
Characteristic
1.99, 4.26
6.2
4.29, 9.02
19.4
13.9, 26.41
2.9
11.4
9.31, 13.79
1.66, 4.83
2.8
6.7
4.59, 9.58
1.75, 3.84
2.6
5.52, 9.56
7.3
2.06, 5.03
3.2
8.9
6.64, 11.74
2.52, 4.11
3.2
[95% CI]
8.9, 12.22
10.5
[95% CI]
1.12, 4.12
2.2
0.38, 2.04
0.9
0.62, 2.73
1.3
0.57, 1.72
1.0
0.83, 2.68
1.5
0.65, 1.74
1.1
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Boy
727
1499
952
854
750
3857
n
7.66, 15.18
10.9
4.52, 8.8
6.3
4.54, 9.85
6.7
3.34, 7.65
5.1
4.88, 10.67
7.3
5.54, 8.11
6.7
[95% CI]
0.41, 2.05
0.9
1.05, 3.1
1.8
1.28, 4.88
2.5
0.62, 1.74
1.0
1.33, 5.47
2.7
1.24, 2.64
1.8
[95% CI]
0.11, 0.99
0.3
0.02, 0.29
0.1
0.12, 1.38
0.4
0.11, 0.76
0.3
0.4, 1.97
0.9
0.06, 0.28
0.1
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Girl
680
1518
1095
845
696
4035
n
11.67, 19.92
15.4
7.21, 10.82
8.9
4.92, 9.05
6.7
4.84, 7.92
6.2
6.28, 10.38
8.1
7.39, 9.84
8.5
[95% CI]
2.59, 5.18
3.7
1.66, 3.36
2.4
1.77, 4
2.7
1.31, 2.54
1.8
2.07, 4.28
3
1.96, 3.18
2.5
[95% CI]
0.71, 2.29
1.3
0.22, 1.04
0.5
0.43, 1.55
0.8
0.4, 1.04
0.6
0.77, 1.89
1.2
0.38, 0.91
0.6
[95% CI]
BMI-for-age BMI-for-age BMI-for-age
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
z >+1 Z
Total
1407
3017
2047
1699
1445
7892
n
Table B30. PREVALENCE OF OVERWEIGHT AND OBESITY (BMI-FOR-AGE) IN CHILDREN 5-19 YEARS OLD BY MATERNAL BMI
AND MATERNAL EDUCATION
APPENDIX B
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B31. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD
BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Age
group
Males
Females
Total
BMI
BMI
BMI
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
N
17.2
3.5
14.7, 20.1
2.3, 5.32
16.4
2.3
20-24
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
N
27.7
7.1
24.61, 30.99
5.46, 9.27
22.9
5.9
1268
25-29
1.56, 3.52
11.1
2.1
30-34
1.28, 3.43
12.4
2.3
35-39
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
22.9
5.5
20.86, 25.13
4.4, 6.82
19.9
4.3
20.19, 25.8
4.47, 7.73
14.9
3.7
3115
18, 21.91
3.4, 5.33
13.1
2.9
11.37, 14.95
2.16, 3.89
13.1
2.4
1500
12.7, 17.48
2.65, 5.05
13.8
2.6
1524
2939
1463
2986
10.15, 15.09
1.28, 4.04
11.47, 16.59
1.74, 3.82
11.23, 15.23
1.74, 3.38
11.6
2.4
13.6
4.6
12.6
3.5
9.25, 14.55
1.44, 4.11
11.28, 16.19
3.33, 6.38
10.8, 14.61
2.7, 4.58
13.9
3.7
13.5
4
13.7
3.8
11.55, 16.18
3.01, 4.81
11.6
3.2
9.62, 13.8
2.3, 4.48
14.5
5.9
40-44
1227
1201
1159
11.42, 16.78
2.62, 5.06
12.3
3.1
50-54
1221
10.81, 16.79
2.81, 5.56
10.9
3.3
821
9.61, 15.62
1.86, 5.05
17.2
6.8
55-59
2429
2380
913
8.58, 13.69
2.24, 4.95
11.9
5
648
1734
668
1316
12.76, 22.67
4.55, 10.18
9.02, 15.57
3.25, 7.72
11.91, 17.53
4.41, 7.92
21.8
9.2
23.1
9.3
22.5
9.2
15.45, 29.75
5.75, 14.43
17.93, 29.22
6.38, 13.32
18.15, 27.51
6.96, 12.19
28.7
13
17.5
8
22.7
10.3
18.11, 27.96
7.43, 14.16
34.6
16.4
60-64
389
65-69
458
244
21.22, 37.54
8.25, 19.88
34.9
15.8
>70
286
12.9, 23.28
4.96, 12.77
34.3
16.9
658
29.08, 41.29 12.43, 19.83
847
530
822
30.08, 38.77 13.72, 20.54
1480
30.77, 38.59 13.94, 19.14
141
APPENDIX B
45-49
N
2783
1682
1439
9.12, 13.45
< 17,0
Kg/m2
1515
1433
13.71, 19.44
< 18,5
Kg/m2
142
Mekong river delta
Southeast
Central highlands
Northern central and coastal area
Northern midlands
and mountainous area
Red river delta
Ecological region
3.32, 5.31
4.2
14.6
12.77, 16.72
2.66, 6.16
4.1
13.1
10.39, 16.47
1.46, 4.62
10.08, 15.95
2.6
12.7
5.2
17.8
3.98, 6.78
1.76, 3.56
9.11, 12.84
14.55, 21.67
2.5
10.8
4.7
3.74, 5.95
[95% CI]
17.38, 22.33
19.7
[95% CI]
2175
1594
558
2425
1456
2601
N
14.21, 18.28
16.1
10.86, 17.42
13.8
11.57, 18.13
14.5
19.58, 25.28
22.3
15.11, 19.83
17.4
19.7, 24.03
21.8
[95% CI]
5.8
4.06, 5.98
4.9
3.45, 6.16
4.6
2.81, 6.38
4.2
6.5, 9.5
7.9
4.27, 6.24
5.2
4.67, 7.14
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
Females
Males
2431
1855
580
2592
1504
2767
N
13.88, 17.12
15.4
11.75, 15.47
13.5
11.61, 15.99
13.7
17.98, 22.49
20.1
12.3, 16.2
14.1
19.02, 22.69
20.8
[95% CI]
5.3
3.98, 5.3
4.6
3.41, 5.56
4.4
2.37, 4.99
3.4
5.64, 7.67
6.6
3.09, 4.81
3.9
4.53, 6.12
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B32. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
APPENDIX B
4605
3449
1138
5018
2961
5369
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
143
Non-poor commune
Poor commune
Total rural
Small city
Large city
Total urban
4.11, 5.48
4.7
17.4
15.87, 19.05
2.18, 4.84
3.3
13
10.37, 16.14
4, 5.25
4.6
16.9
15.51, 18.43
3.07, 5.35
4.1
11.7
9.8, 13.98
0.79, 4.43
10.09, 18.08
1.9
13.6
3.2
2.35, 4.36
[95% CI]
10.54, 14.68
12.5
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
7101
872
7973
1725
1112
2837
N
19.24, 22.24
20.7
15.52, 21.78
18.5
19.13, 21.85
20.5
12.94, 17.86
15.2
7.22, 14.3
10.2
11.28, 15.56
13.3
[95% CI]
4.3
5.58, 7.02
6.3
4.74, 7.61
6
5.61, 6.93
6.2
4.11, 6.77
5.3
1.65, 4.86
2.8
3.37, 5.54
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
7672
930
8602
1903
1225
3128
N
3.8
17.98, 20.31
19.1
5.07, 6.04
5.5
3.69, 5.93
4.7
15.8
13.26, 18.73
5.02, 5.9
5.4
3.83, 5.76
4.7
1.54, 3.69
2.4
3.07, 4.68
[95% CI]
17.71, 19.85
18.8
11.82, 15.54
13.6
9.55, 14.57
11.8
11.47, 14.45
12.9
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
BMI
APPENDIX B
Region
Total
Females
Males
Table B33. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD
BY SEX AND URBAN/RURAL
14772
1802
16574
3627
2337
5965
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
144
Kho me
Dao
Nung
Muong
Thai
H’mong
Tay
Kinh
Others
Ethnic group
4.4
3.84, 5.05
3.2
2.09, 4.98
1.2
0.31, 4.44
0.9
0.27, 3.16
2.5
1.32, 4.66
3
1.04, 8.27
1.3
0.36, 4.23
3.8
1.52, 9.39
4.2
2.37, 7.35
15.14, 17.8
11.5
8.38, 15.59
4.5
2.37, 8.43
5.5
3.44, 8.75
11.5
7.27, 17.6
14.2
7.67, 24.75
14.5
9.33, 21.8
13
6.7, 23.68
12.3
9.13, 16.39
[95% CI]
16.4
[95% CI]
315
138
65
84
168
169
95
271
9482
N
17.72, 29.29
23
11.07, 36.11
21
7.61, 21.07
12.9
11.54, 31.07
19.5
10.08, 18.76
13.9
11.41, 22.33
16.1
5.68, 15.15
9.4
14.63, 26.19
19.8
17.37, 19.9
18.6
[95% CI]
5.8
4.24, 10.44
6.7
2.46, 11.38
5.4
1.95, 8.95
4.2
4.87, 15.78
8.9
2.31, 8.78
4.6
1.13, 5.72
2.6
1.37, 6.04
2.9
4.31, 10.13
6.7
5.2, 6.41
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
Females
Males
316
146
63
102
174
175
100
265
10362
N
14.02, 22.01
17.7
12.25, 23.34
17.1
9.84, 18.78
13.7
10.36, 26.92
17.1
9.08, 17.42
12.7
8.26, 14.33
10.9
4.32, 11.22
7
11.99, 20.04
15.6
16.63, 18.53
17.6
[95% CI]
5.1
3.57, 8.26
5.5
2.88, 7.38
4.6
1.25, 5.84
2.7
3.75, 10.19
6.2
2.2, 5.68
3.5
0.97, 3.2
1.8
1.12, 3.82
2.1
3.47, 6.94
4.9
4.71, 5.57
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B34. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND ETHNICITY
APPENDIX B
681
283
128
186
342
344
195
536
19844
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
145
3 or more meals
Less than 3 meals/day
Number of meals in the last 24 hours
Diversified
Normal
No diversified
Household food diversification
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Education
18.3
14.85, 22.42
15.5
14.23, 16.85
16.9
15.19, 18.77
15
13.17, 16.97
14.8
12.94, 16.81
20
17.7, 22.5
15.7
12.99, 18.83
16.7
14.79, 18.84
12.8
11.32, 14.52
[95% CI]
5.7
3.74, 8.48
4.1
3.54, 4.65
4.6
3.77, 5.5
4.2
3.27, 5.32
3.6
2.68, 4.92
8.6
7.01, 10.42
4.4
3.34, 5.82
3.4
2.62, 4.36
2.9
2.17, 3.88
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
9705
1062
2434
3596
4736
3510
3539
2096
1659
N
19.5
16.46, 23.03
18.5
17.26, 19.69
19.9
18.38, 21.48
17.9
16.16, 19.77
17
14.9, 19.41
21.9
19.63, 24.38
15.9
14.02, 17.88
17
15.21, 18.96
19.8
17.52, 22.3
[95% CI]
2758
3877
5044
2945
3750
2441
2579
N
7.5
1129
5.56, 9.98
5.6
10551
5, 6.16
6.2
5.47, 7.12
5.5
4.57, 6.6
5.2
4.05, 6.55
9.1
7.7, 10.77
5.4
4.31, 6.7
4.1
3.27, 5.02
5.2
4.11, 6.53
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
APPENDIX B
Characteristic
Females
Males
19
16.37, 21.83
17
16.12, 17.99
18.4
17.19, 19.76
16.5
15.19, 17.87
16
14.39, 17.7
21.2
19.38, 23.06
15.8
14.03, 17.7
16.9
15.51, 18.31
16
14.59, 17.54
[95% CI]
5193
7473
9780
6455
7289
4538
4238
N
6.6
2190
4.93, 8.76
4.8
20256
4.44, 5.27
5.4
4.88, 6.03
4.9
4.21, 5.61
4.4
3.6, 5.48
8.9
7.78, 10.17
4.9
4.08, 5.96
3.7
3.21, 4.34
3.9
3.28, 4.75
[95% CI]
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B35. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX, EDUCATION, HOUSEHOLD FOOD
DIVERSIFICATION AND NUMBER OF MEAL IN THE LAST 24 HOURS
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B36. PREVALENCE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
SEX AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
Males
Household
wealth
Females
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
17.6
N
5
Poor
Marginal
poor
Total
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
21.1
7.4
1458
15.08, 20.32
3.78, 6.48
19.1
5.6
4.17, 7.38
17.7
4.6
Middle
18.7, 23.63
5.94, 9.07
24.9
7.9
3.45, 6.23
15
3.6
Marginal rich
22.47, 27.42
6.55, 9.5
21.9
7.1
2.67, 4.77
12.3
3.3
Rich
19.4, 24.64
5.81, 8.7
16.1
4.3
2.46, 4.5
15.8
4.2
Total
13.99, 18.43
3.43, 5.5
13.5
3.9
APPENDIX B
3.71, 4.8
6.2
17.48, 21.48
5.24, 7.38
22
6.8
19.81, 24.41
5.76, 7.91
19.9
5.9
18.19, 21.73
5.05, 6.96
15.6
4
13.92, 17.36
3.32, 4.75
12.9
3.6
11.54, 14.39
3, 4.37
17.2
5
16.35, 18.09
4.63, 5.41
3090
3652
4288
5092
3070
11.7, 15.48
3.04, 4.97
18.5
5.7
10809
14.58, 16.99
19.4
2446
3070
10.28, 14.58
[95% CI]
2052
2446
12.77, 17.51
[95% CI]
N
1784
2052
15.24, 20.48
< 17,0
Kg/m2
1458
1784
16.06, 22.47
N
< 18,5
Kg/m2
6416
10809
17.42, 19.72
5.2, 6.31
22539
Table B37. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND AGE GROUP
Males
Age group
Females
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
1268
20.34, 20.79
1433
20.9, 21.5
146
1682
6.2
3115
7.7
2939
20.6, 21.17
21.6
8.3
20.86, 22.17
2783
20.9
7.3
1439
4.5
19.99, 20.39
21.5
7
21.08, 22.19
1515
20.16, 21.08
21.6
N
20.2
5.5
20.6
4.7
SD
[95% CI]
19.55, 20.22
21.2
30-34
N
19.9
2.8
25-29
Mean
SD
[95% CI]
20.6
20-24
Total
1500
21.17, 21.97
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Males
Age group
Mean
[95% CI]
21.5
35-39
21.1, 21.87
21.4
40-44
21.12, 21.67
21.5
45-49
20.97, 22.1
21.4
50-54
20.97, 21.87
21.2
55-59
20.76, 21.7
20.7
60-64
20, 21.37
20.3
65-69
19.74, 20.87
20
>70
19.5, 20.42
Females
SD
N
5.9
1524
4.1
1227
9.5
1159
5.6
821
2.8
648
2.9
389
2.8
244
3.9
658
Mean
N
3.3
1463
3.6
1201
5.1
1221
4.8
913
8
668
3.3
458
3
286
10.1
822
21.3
21.09, 21.54
21.5
21.21, 21.86
21.7
21.35, 22.09
22.1
21.51, 22.58
22
21.21, 22.87
21.4
20.83, 21.87
21.1
20.63, 21.52
19.82, 21.93
Mean
SD
[95% CI]
20.9
Total
[95% CI]
21.4
21.17, 21.64
21.5
21.24, 21.69
21.6
21.3, 21.96
21.8
21.38, 22.12
21.6
21.18, 22.11
21
20.56, 21.53
20.7
20.35, 21.09
20.5
19.86, 21.08
SD
N
4.9
2986
3.8
2429
7.5
2380
5.2
1734
6
1316
3.2
847
3
530
7.9
1480
APPENDIX B
Table B38. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
SEX AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
Males
Ecological region
Mean
SD
Females
N
[95% CI]
Northern central
and coastal area
2425
20.52, 21.22
580
2.9
1138
3.3
3449
5.8
4605
21.8
3.9
1855
21.53, 22.16
21.8
5.9
5018
20.66, 21.09
21.46, 22.6
21.3
7.4
20.9
3.1
1594
21.2, 22.05
2961
20.55, 21.1
22
2.5
20.92, 21.68
2592
20.56, 21.14
21.6
6.5
20.8
7.7
558
20.66, 21.14
5369
20.65, 21.04
20.9
2.6
Mekong river delta
1504
20.4, 21.18
20.9
5.6
20.8
7.7
20.8
7.1
N
20.74, 21.33
20.28, 20.83
20.9
Southeast
2767
20.6
1456
20.93, 21.35
SD
21
5.9
20.48, 21.27
4.9
Mean
[95% CI]
2601
21.1
Central highlands
N
20.9
5.3
20.89, 21.51
Northern midlands
and mountainous area
SD
[95% CI]
21.2
Red river delta
Mean
Total
2175
21.6
5.7
21.36, 22.17
2431
21.23, 21.86
147
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B39. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
SEX AND URBAN/RURAL
Males
Region
Mean
[95% CI]
21.8
Total urban
21.47, 22.03
22.3
Large city
21.7, 22.81
21.4
Small city
21.19, 21.66
21
Total ruralv
20.81, 21.16
21
Poor commune
20.69, 21.27
Non-poor commune
21
20.79, 21.18
Females
Mean
SD
N
3.3
2837
2.9
1112
3
1725
6.3
7973
6.2
872
6.2
7101
[95% CI]
22.1
21.69, 22.57
22.9
22.19, 23.67
21.6
21.14, 22.08
20.8
20.65, 21.03
20.8
20.44, 21.11
20.9
20.63, 21.06
Total
Mean
SD
N
5.5
3128
4.5
1225
5.6
1903
6.5
8602
7.6
930
6.3
7672
SD
[95% CI]
22
21.69, 22.21
22.6
22.32, 22.9
21.5
21.2, 21.85
20.9
20.76, 21.06
4.6
5965
3.8
2337
4.5
3627
6.4
16574
7
1802
6.2
14772
20.9
20.63, 21.11
20.9
20.75, 21.08
N
Table B40. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND ETHNICITY
APPENDIX B
Males
Ethnic group
Mean
[95% CI]
Kinh
Tay
H’mong
Thai
Muong
Nung
Dao
Kho me
Others
148
21.2
21.02, 21.36
21
20.62, 21.38
22.3
20.5, 24.11
21
20.85, 21.18
21
20.58, 21.5
21.2
20.71, 21.69
20.9
20.51, 21.33
20.8
20.17, 21.41
21.2
20.78, 21.59
Females
SD
N
5.5
9482
4
271
15.7
95
2
169
5.9
168
4
84
3.2
65
3.6
138
3.2
338
Mean
[95% CI]
21.2
21, 21.42
21
19.99, 21.91
21.2
20.72, 21.58
20.6
20.32, 20.95
20.6
20.29, 20.87
20.8
20.23, 21.34
21.8
19.41, 24.24
21.8
20.1, 23.57
20.8
20.26, 21.35
Total
SD
N
6
10362
12.9
265
3.6
100
2.9
175
3
174
3.6
102
23.7
63
6.9
146
4.4
343
Mean
[95% CI]
21.2
21.06, 21.35
21
20.44, 21.51
21.7
20.71, 22.72
20.8
20.61, 21.03
20.8
20.57, 21.04
21
20.57, 21.38
21.4
20.08, 22.66
21.3
20.29, 22.37
21
20.56, 21.42
SD
N
5.8
19844
9.3
536
11.3
195
2.5
344
4.6
342
3.8
186
16.6
128
5.5
283
3.8
681
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B41. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND BY
EDUCATION, HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION AND NUMBER
OF MEALS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS
Males
Characteristic
Females
Mean
Total
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
SD
N
8.2
4238
5.1
4538
4.0
7289
6.6
6455
6.4
9780
5.4
7473
5.9
5193
3,7
2190
6.2
20256
[95%CI]
Education
20.8
No school
21.5
5.7
1668
20,46 21,05
Primary
school
2602
20,9 21,55
21.5
4.2
2099
20,75 21,17
21.2
5.7
2447
21,16 21,73
20.9
High school
or higher
9.4
21,03 22,02
21.0
Middle school
21.2
21.02 21,42
21.0
3.5
3552
20,9
4.5
3771
20,74 21,07
20,72 21,23
20.79 21,09
21.8
20.9
21.4
7.2
3529
21,46 22,15
5.7
2954
21,17 21,66
20.9
21.0
Household food diversification
21.0
No diversified
5.2
4759
20,79 21,17
21.1
Normal
7.3
5065
20,68 21,2
20,78 21,15
21.4
3.9
3607
21.3
6.5
3911
20,86 21,26
21,01 21,87
21,01 21,51
21.8
21.3
21.5
Diversified
7.6
2444
21,34 22,18
3.9
2762
20,98 21,52
21,21 21,77
Number of meals in the last 24 hours
Less than 3
meals/day
3 or more
meals
20.8
21.2
2.8
1065
21.0
4.4
1131
20,45 21,24
20,78 21,57
20,7 21,33
21.2
21.2
21.2
5.8
21,06 21,39
9745
6.5
20,98 21,39
10607
21,06 21,34
149
APPENDIX B
20,65 21,24
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B42. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
SEX AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
Males
Household
wealth
Females
Mean
Mean
SD
SD
N
[95% CI]
20.5
Poor
1462
2250
20.43, 21.15
2457
2655
21.07, 21.8
22.1
3082
21.79, 22.45
5.7
5113
5.1
6449
21.04, 21.55
21.9
5.7
4311
21.3
7.1
20.91, 21.39
6.5
20.58, 21.09
21.4
3.6
3666
20.8
4.8
21.2
3.6
20.25, 20.56
20.8
2062
20.53, 21.25
Rich
1875
20.13, 20.47
7.9
3104
20.4
3.5
20.9
8.7
20.45, 21.07
20.3
1790
20.29, 20.73
Middle
1642
20.41, 21.53
3.7
N
20.8
11.2
20.5
SD
[95% CI]
21
4.2
20.33, 20.72
Marginal
rich
Mean
N
[95% CI]
Marginal
poor
Total
22
4.5
3367
21.55, 22.15
21.76, 22.19
APPENDIX B
Table B43. PREVALECE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND AGE GROUPS
Urban
Rural
BMI
BMI
Age group
<18,5 Kg/m2 <17,0 Kg/m2
<18,5 Kg/m2 <17,0 Kg/m2
N
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
24.3
6.6
20-24
[95% CI]
22.5
5.1
20.15, 24.94
3.89, 6.69
19.8
3.7
17.6, 22.12
2.89, 4.72
14.9
3.4
12.94, 17.13
2.51, 4.65
15
3
12.68, 17.59
2.13, 4.2
13.5
4.1
11.41, 15.94
3.06, 5.42
694
18.74, 30.98
4.46, 9.66
20.2
5.7
25-29
2089
882
16.38, 24.65
3.61, 8.84
7.6
1.4
30-34
2233
748
5.14, 11.16
0.64, 2.94
7.4
0.7
35-39
2191
735
5.14, 10.49
0.26, 1.73
9.4
1.6
40-44
2251
548
6.31, 13.76
150
N
[95% CI]
0.75, 3.34
1881
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Age group
Urban
Rural
BMI
BMI
<18,5 Kg/m2 <17,0 Kg/m2
<18,5 Kg/m2 <17,0 Kg/m2
N
[95% CI]
N
[95% CI]
11.5
[95% CI]
2.1
45-49
[95% CI]
14.5
4.4
12.47, 16.7
3.41, 5.62
14.6
4
12.22, 17.42
2.78, 5.71
16.2
6.1
13.22, 19.63
4.42, 8.48
26.2
10.4
21.6, 31.45
7.65, 13.95
26.7
11.4
21.19, 33.03
8.09, 15.93
40.1
18.6
36.16, 44.13
15.83, 21.7
604
6.16, 20.34
1.07, 4.22
4.6
1.5
50-54
1776
532
2.78, 7.47
0.63, 3.3
11.5
5.5
55-59
1202
471
6.7, 18.98
2.98, 10.05
14.6
6.8
60-64
845
272
7.75, 25.71
3.36, 13.44
10.5
7
65-69
575
132
5.19, 19.92
2.69, 16.81
16.7
9.2
>70
398
348
10.59, 25.2
1132
5.01, 16.25
Table B44. PREVALECE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
Ecological region
Rural
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
15.2
N
2.9
Red river delta
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
Northern central and
coastal area
< 18,5
Kg/m2
< 17,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
N
22.6
6
20.27, 25
5.18, 6.96
15.3
4.2
13.21, 17.72
3.26, 5.27
21.4
6.9
18.8, 24.35
5.68, 8.33
15.2
4.1
13.58, 17.02
2.91, 5.63
17.5
5.6
14.31, 21.14
4.49, 7.03
15.6
4.5
13.98, 17.47
3.86, 5.29
1280
12.54, 18.31
1.42, 5.81
8.9
2.6
4088
551
4.54, 16.88
1.24, 5.3
16.1
5.6
2409
1218
13.3, 19.3
3.94, 7.99
7.1
0.9
Central highlands
3800
220
4.36, 11.38
0.19, 4.12
11
3.5
Southeast
918
2100
9.19, 13.01
2.43, 5.15
14
5
Mekong river delta
1349
595
11.15, 17.45
APPENDIX B
Urban
3.48, 7.22
4010
151
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B45. PREVALECE OF CED (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
Urban
Household
wealth
Rural
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
< 18,5 Kg/m2 < 17,0 Kg/m2
N
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
17.2
N
[95% CI]
6.9
Poor
[95% CI]
19.5
6.2
17.39, 21.86
5.12, 7.45
23.1
7
20.66, 25.76
5.94, 8.29
20.7
6
18.79, 22.74
5, 7.13
16.5
4
14.52, 18.67
3.24, 4.87
13.8
4.2
12.04, 15.66
3.32, 5.18
18.8
5.4
17.64, 19.93
4.99, 5.93
164
11.92, 24.22
4, 11.76
13
4.5
Marginal poor
2927
391
8.69, 18.96
2.65, 7.68
15.1
5.7
Middle
3261
607
11.18, 20
3.61, 8.87
13.2
4
Marginal rich
3681
1456
10.56, 16.47
2.56, 6.11
12.1
3.1
Rich
3636
3347
9.98, 14.64
2.27, 4.32
12.9
3.8
Total
3070
5965
APPENDIX B
11.38, 14.56
3.03, 4.74
16574
Table B46. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND AGE GROUP
Urban
Age group
Rural
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
694
19.89 20.52
882
20.54 21.98
7.6
2191
5.3
2251
21.2
7.7
748
21.57 23.59
20.82 21.63
22.0
152
2233
20.46 21.02
22.6
21.2
2.9
21.55 22.35
6.3
20.7
6.1
35-39
2089
19.94 20.44
21.3
30-34
5.0
20.2
2.6
25-29
N
[95% CI]
20.2
20-24
SD
735
20.93 21.51
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Urban
Age group
Rural
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
22.4
40-44
548
21.76 23.06
604
21.66 22.47
532
22.33 24.03
4.8
1202
7.4
845
2.8
575
3.0
398
8.0
1132
20.79 21.44
22.3
21.3
2.8
471
21.75 22.91
20.61 21.9
22.2
20.5
3.6
272
21.09 23.24
20.21 20.83
21.8
20.4
2.6
132
21.11 22.48
19.95 20.78
22.4
>70
1776
21.1
5.8
65-69
8.4
21.06 21.9
23.2
60-64
1881
21.5
3.3
55-59
2.9
20.96 21.42
22.1
50-54
N
21.2
6.2
45-49
SD
[95% CI]
19.9
7.0
348
20.4 24.35
19.29 20.45
Urban
Ecological region
Nông thôn
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
SD
N
5.8
4088
6.9
2409
7.8
3800
2.8
918
2.8
1349
4.9
4010
[95% CI]
22.1
Red river delta
20.7
4.6
1280
21.64, 22.57
Northern midlands and mountainous area
APPENDIX B
Table B47. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
20.34, 21.06
21.2
20.8
3.2
551
20.66, 21.75
20.52, 21
21.5
Northern central and coastal area
20.6
4.4
1218
21.21, 21.7
20.25, 21
21.2
Central highlands
20.8
2.8
220
20.96, 21.5
20.56, 21.02
22.2
Southeast
21.2
3.6
2100
21.76, 22.7
20.77, 21.71
22.6
Mekong river delta
21.4
10.7
21.21, 23.97
595
21.1, 21.68
153
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B48. MEAN BMI IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY
URBAN/RURAL AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
Urban
Household wealth
Rural
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
22.3
Poor
N
7.8
2927
3.3
3261
6.3
3681
6.4
3636
5.7
3070
6.2
16574
20.7
16.8
164
19.05, 25.51
20.4, 20.95
21.1
Marginal poor
20.3
5
391
20.55, 21.58
20.15, 20.49
21.7
Middle
20.7
6.3
607
20.56, 22.76
20.46, 20.94
21.6
Marginal rich
21.2
3.1
1456
21.17, 21.94
20.86, 21.52
22.3
Rich
21.7
5
3347
21.96, 22.57
21.31, 22.03
22
Total
20.9
5.3
5965
21.66, 22.24
APPENDIX B
SD
[95% CI]
20.75, 21.07
Table B49. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS (>19 YRS)
BY SEX AND AGE GROUPS
Males
Age
group
Females
> 25
Kg/m2
> 30,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
3
N
0
20-24
> 30,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
1.1
N
0
1294
1.85, 4.84
4.4
0.4
0.13, 0.98
5.2
0.4
30-34
3.3
0.08, 2.11
5.5
0.8
35-39
0.23, 2.55
5.8
0.3
40-44
2.11, 5
5.4
0.7
0.08, 0.91
N
0
2799
3.8
0.2
2.83, 5
0.06, 0.46
5.3
0.6
4, 6.98
0.26, 1.32
5.8
0.5
4.7, 7.15
0.21, 1.33
6.6
0.3
4.37, 9.81
0.12, 0.67
3117
1509
3.9, 7.47
0.3, 1.86
6.2
0.3
2942
1477
4.77, 7.91
0.11, 0.73
7.4
0.3
1249
3.45, 9.57
[95% CI]
1674
1518
3.98, 7.45
[95% CI]
2
0
1433
2.92, 9
> 30,0
Kg/m2
1.39, 2.87
1443
3.15, 6.01
> 25
Kg/m2
1505
0.7, 1.84
25-29
154
> 25
Kg/m2
Total
2995
1240
4.94, 10.9
0.1, 0.99
2489
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Males
Age
group
Females
> 25
Kg/m2
> 30,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
5.5
N
0.4
45-49
> 25
Kg/m2
> 30,0
Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
9.7
0.17, 1.09
5.5
0.2
50-54
0.06, 0.93
7.8
0.1
55-59
7.57, 12.28
0.21, 3.57
10.9
2.1
0.01, 0.4
3.9
0
60-64
8.12, 14.44
0.83, 5.38
10.7
0.2
1.6
0.2
65-69
8.07, 14.11
0.06, 0.99
10.4
0.4
0.03, 1.54
3.9
1.3
>70
6.67, 15.79
0.1, 1.35
4.9
0.3
0.2, 7.79
7.6
0.7
6.17, 9.44
0.24, 1.8
8.3
1.2
6.53, 10.57
0.5, 2.96
9.3
0.2
7.16, 12
0.05, 0.51
7.3
0.2
5.02, 10.51
0.05, 0.71
3.4
0.3
2.82, 8.26
0.05, 2.33
2.12, 5.41
0.06, 1.18
6.6
1.2
5.4
1.2
3.85, 7.58
0.49, 3.15
1741
1301
825
524
830
4.16, 10.2
0.46, 3.15
N
2428
285
638
1.92, 7.86
[95% CI]
435
239
0.53, 5
[95% CI]
672
390
2.27, 6.58
> 30,0
Kg/m2
907
629
5.04, 11.84
> 25
Kg/m2
1243
833
3.83, 7.95
N
0.9
1184
3.83, 7.9
Total
1468
APPENDIX B
155
156
Mekong river delta
Southeast
Central highlands
Northern central and coastal area
Northern midlands and mountainous
area
Red river delta
Ecological region
0
2.5
0.15, 0.68
0.3
6.2
5.02, 7.59
0.64, 3.32
6.22, 13.26
2310
9.47, 12.04
10.7
8.47, 16.58
11.9
1526
9.1
4.1
2.54, 6.57
599
2.73, 4.64
1.56, 4.12
1.5
0.09, 0.53
2.54, 4.54
3.6
2472
3.4
0.2
1.4, 2.98
1.76, 3.35
2
0.2
2.4
1459
2.69, 5.59
3.9
[95% CI]
0.07, 0.51
2484
N
> 25
Kg/m2
3.61, 6.27
0.2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
4.8
< 30,0
Kg/m2
0.55, 1.28
0.8
0.9, 3.13
1.7
0.01, 0.73
0.1
0.1, 0.5
0.2
0.01, 0.39
0.1
0.04, 0.88
0.2
[95% CI]
< 30,0
Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
> 25
Kg/m2
Females
Males
2558
1787
615
2648
1518
2652
N
7.64, 9.55
8.5
7.93, 14.17
10.7
2.21, 4.99
3.3
2.84, 4.27
3.5
1.66, 3
2.2
3.36, 5.52
4.3
[95% CI]
> 25
Kg/m2
0.4, 0.88
0.6
0.98, 2.55
1.6
0.01, 0.37
0.1
0.11, 0.43
0.2
0.05, 0.27
0.1
0.08, 0.46
0.2
[95% CI]
< 30,0
Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B50. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS (>19 YRS) BY SEX AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
APPENDIX B
4868
3313
1214
5120
2977
5136
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
157
Non-poor commune
Poor commune
Total rural
Small city
Large city
Total urban
0.15, 0.7
0.3
5.5
4.65, 6.46
0.01, 0.24
0
4.5
3.1, 6.42
0.14, 0.63
0.3
5.4
4.61, 6.26
0.36, 1.38
0.7
9
7.07, 11.34
0.51, 3.8
1.4
17.8
12.42, 24.74
0.51, 1.88
1.0
[95% CI]
9.66, 15.83
12.4
[95% CI]
> 25.0 Kg/m2 < 30.0 Kg/m2
APPENDIX B
Ecological region
Males
7098
872
7970
1725
1112
2837
N
5.67, 7.7
6.6
4.67, 9.63
6.7
5.77, 7.6
6.6
9.32, 14.05
11.5
12.47, 23.63
17.4
11.24, 16.78
13.8
[95% CI]
0.34, 0.87
0.5
0.18, 1.48
0.5
0.35, 0.84
0.5
0.44, 1.44
0.8
0.68, 3.82
1.6
0.62, 2
1.1
[95% CI]
> 25.0 Kg/m2 < 30.0 Kg/m2
Females
7668
930
8598
1900
1224
3124
N
5.33, 6.91
6.1
4.29, 7.4
5.6
5.35, 6.78
6
8.39, 12.55
10.3
13.22, 22.91
17.6
10.8, 15.87
13.1
[95% CI]
0.26, 0.74
0.4
0.11, 0.77
0.3
0.26, 0.69
0.4
0.44, 1.28
0.8
0.78, 2.95
1.5
0.66, 1.68
1.1
[95% CI]
> 25.0 Kg/m2 < 30.0 Kg/m2
Total
Table B51. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS (>19 YRS) BY SEX AND URBAN/RURAL
14767
1802
16569
3624
2337
5961
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
158
Others
Kho me
Dao
Nung
Muong
Thai
H’mong
Tay
Kinh
Ethnic groups
0
3.8
0.2
0.02, 1.26
2.83, 9.6
0
0
0
0
0
5.3
0.27, 4.41
1.1
0.18, 9.48
1.4
2.46, 8.96
4.7
0.06, 2.84
0.4
0.03, 1.65
0.2
1.84, 9.83
4.3
0
0.26, 0.72
4.45, 6.12
2.12, 6.65
0.4
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
5.2
< 30,0 Kg/m2
310
125
69
83
180
183
113
254
9533
N
6.5
2.82, 15.5
6.8
4.91, 17.43
9.5
0.58, 15.07
3.1
2.77, 11.51
5.7
0.46, 7.48
1.9
1.04, 6.28
2.6
2.12, 18.28
6.5
1.2, 4.38
2.3
5.63, 7.49
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
0.5
0.41, 17.82
2.9
0.21, 9.03
1.4
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.34, 0.78
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
> 25,0 Kg/m2
Females
Males
313
149
67
97
184
191
115
259
10404
N
5.9
3.61, 9.91
6
3.07, 10.13
5.6
0.61, 7.88
2.2
3.08, 8.92
5.3
0.35, 3.76
1.2
0.62, 3.24
1.4
2.12, 13.21
5.4
1.87, 4.9
3
5.19, 6.66
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
0.5
0.25, 8.76
1.5
0.12, 5.08
0.8
0
0
0
0
0
0
0.33, 0.69
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B52. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND ETHNICITY
APPENDIX B
623
274
136
179
364
374
229
513
19937
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
159
3 or more meals
Less than 3 meals/day
Number of meals in the last 24 hours
Diversified
Normal
No diversified
Household food diversification
High school or higher
Middle school
Primary school
No school
Education
0.33, 1.5
6.49, 9.62
4.32, 5.96
5.1
2.31, 5.52
0.26, 0.7
0.4
0
0.7
7.9
3.6
0.08, 1.18
0.3, 1.35
5.16, 8.55
3.18, 4.87
0.6
6.7
0.3
0.1, 0.44
3.55, 5.97
3.9
0.2
4.6
0.09, 0.45
0.04, 0.37
2.76, 5.06
2.56, 4.26
0.1
3.7
0.2
0.14, 2.72
2.53, 5.15
3.3
0.6
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
3.6
< 30,0 Kg/m2
> 25,0 Kg/m2
9842
1009
3400
3327
4005
3455
3599
2149
1643
N
9.4
5.16, 7.1
6.1
6.88, 11.22
8.8
7.15, 11.24
9
4.81, 7.05
5.8
3.21, 5.06
4
2.65, 4.72
3.5
3.6, 5.85
4.6
6.82, 11.18
8.8
7.78, 11.35
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
1.1
0.34, 0.82
0.5
0.3, 1.53
0.7
0.46, 1.47
0.8
0.23, 0.93
0.5
0.14, 1.02
0.4
0.07, 0.94
0.3
0.08, 0.6
0.2
0.28, 1.92
0.7
0.62, 2.02
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
APPENDIX B
Characteristic
Females
Males
10810
968
3878
3562
4218
2900
3749
2493
2624
N
7.2
4.88, 6.4
5.6
4.83, 7.79
6.1
7.09, 10.13
8.5
4.27, 5.66
4.9
3.04, 4.45
3.7
4.3, 6.37
5.2
3.89, 5.44
4.6
5.33, 7.76
6.4
6.04, 8.53
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
0.9
0.35, 0.67
0.5
0.15, 0.75
0.3
0.51, 1.15
0.8
0.2, 0.76
0.4
0.14, 0.59
0.3
0.25, 0.89
0.5
0.11, 0.41
0.2
0.19, 1.06
0.5
0.42, 2.03
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
Table B53. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND BY EDUCATION,
HOUSEHOLD FOOD DIVERSIFICATION AND NUMBER OF MEALS IN THE LAST 24 HOURS
20652
1977
7278
6889
8223
6356
7349
4642
4266
N
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
160
Total
Rich
Marginal rich
Middle
Marginal poor
Poor
Household wealth
0.24, 0.64
0.4
4.9
4.25, 5.73
0.5, 1.84
1
9.6
8.07, 11.38
0.2, 0.77
0.4
5.4
4.32, 6.77
0, 0.12
0
2.7
1.89, 3.84
0.02, 0.38
0.1
2.2
1.55, 3.14
0.01, 0.46
0.44, 1.51
0.1
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
0.8
< 30,0 Kg/m2
10850
3087
2434
2056
1830
1443
N
4
5.45, 7.25
6.3
6.77, 9.78
8.1
6.38, 11.06
8.4
3.83, 5.93
4.8
2.86, 4.92
3.8
2.94, 5.3
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
0.3
0.37, 0.81
0.5
0.53, 1.86
1
0.27, 1.24
0.6
0.14, 0.58
0.3
0.07, 0.6
0.2
0.12, 0.72
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
BMI
> 25,0 Kg/m2
Females
Males
11778
3385
2637
2237
1903
1616
N
2.5
4.99, 6.37
5.6
7.79, 10.01
8.8
5.57, 8.72
7
3.09, 4.62
3.8
2.39, 3.76
3
1.9, 3.21
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
0.2
0.34, 0.64
0.5
0.62, 1.54
1
0.28, 0.83
0.5
0.08, 0.31
0.2
0.06, 0.35
0.1
0.08, 0.41
[95% CI]
< 30,0 Kg/m2
BMI
Total
22629
6472
5071
4293
3733
3060
N
Table B54. PREVALENCE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS OLD BY SEX AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
APPENDIX B
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B55. PREVALECE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS
OLD BY URBAN/RURAL AND AGE GROUPS
Urban
Age group
Rural
> 25,0 Kg/m2
> 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
> 25,0 Kg/m2
> 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
N
19.6
2.6
20-24
N
19.6
2.2
19.44, 19.68
3.89, 6.69
20
2.3
19.89, 20.16
2.89, 4.72
20.4
2.4
20.22, 20.49
2.51, 4.65
20.6
2.5
20.4, 20.73
2.13, 4.2
20.7
2.4
20.46, 20.86
3.06, 5.42
20.7
2.7
20.54, 20.88
3.41, 5.62
20.5
2.6
20.3, 20.69
2.78, 5.71
20.5
2.7
20.22, 20.69
4.42, 8.48
20
2.7
19.69, 20.27
7.65, 13.95
19.8
2.8
19.4, 20.11
8.09, 15.93
19.2
3.1
18.89, 19.5
15.83, 21.7
693
19.35, 19.94
4.46, 9.66
20.2
2.6
25-29
2107
869
19.85, 20.59
3.61, 8.84
21.2
2.7
30-34
2248
779
20.82, 21.66
0.64, 2.94
21.4
2.6
35-39
2163
759
21.1, 21.75
0.26, 1.73
21.6
3
40-44
2236
614
21.05, 22.07
0.75, 3.34
21.4
3
45-49
1875
656
1.07, 4.22
22.3
3.1
50-54
1772
550
21.72, 22.82
0.63, 3.3
22
2.9
55-59
1191
441
21.47, 22.44
2.98, 10.05
21.4
3.4
60-64
860
240
20.45, 22.35
3.36, 13.44
21.2
2.5
65-69
585
134
20.53, 21.77
2.69, 16.81
20.9
3.5
>70
390
346
19.95, 21.86
5.01, 16.25
1120
161
APPENDIX B
21.05, 21.75
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B56. PREVALECE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS
OLD BY URBAN/RURAL AND ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
Ecological region
Red river delta
Northern midlands
and mountainous area
Northern central and
coastal area
Central highlands
Southeast
APPENDIX B
Mekong river delta
Urban
Rural
BMI
BMI
> 25,0 Kg/m2
> 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
N
21.2
2.3
20.82, 21.65
1.42, 5.81
20.7
3.4
20.18, 21.12
1.24, 5.3
20.8
3.6
20.52, 21.07
3.94, 7.99
20.5
2.4
20.04, 20.98
0.19, 4.12
21.4
2.3
20.95, 21.91
2.43, 5.15
21.2
3.5
20.9, 21.45
3.48, 7.22
1228
551
1206
303
1989
804
> 25,0 Kg/m2
> 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
19.9
2.1
19.78, 20.05
5.18, 6.96
20.2
2.9
20.02, 20.33
3.26, 5.27
19.9
2.3
19.71, 20.08
5.68, 8.33
20.3
2.6
20.11, 20.51
2.91, 5.63
20.7
2.7
20.17, 21.23
4.49, 7.03
20.7
2.6
20.53, 20.81
3.86, 5.29
N
3908
2426
3915
911
1324
4065
Table B57. PREVALECE OF OVERNUTRITION (BMI) IN ADULTS OVER 19 YEARS
OLD BY URBAN/RURAL AND HOUSEHOLD WEALTH
Urban
Household wealth
> 25,0 Kg/m2 > 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
Poor
Marginal poor
Middle
Marginal rich
Rich
Total
162
Rural
[95% CI]
20.2
3.6
19.55, 20.78
4, 11.76
20.2
2.9
19.85, 20.49
2.65, 7.68
20.6
3.2
20.26, 20.99
3.61, 8.87
21
3.1
20.6, 21.36
2.56, 6.11
21.4
2.7
21.22, 21.63
2.27, 4.32
21.1
3
20.88, 21.35
3.03, 4.74
N
157
422
648
1442
3410
6081
> 25,0 Kg/m2 > 30,0 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
19.9
2.6
19.8, 20.06
5.12, 7.45
19.9
2.5
19.72, 20.01
5.94, 8.29
20
2.5
19.89, 20.15
5, 7.13
20.4
2.5
20.26, 20.58
3.24, 4.87
20.9
2.5
20.69, 21.07
3.32, 5.18
20.2
2.6
20.12, 20.32
4.99, 5.93
N
2902
3311
3645
3628
3061
16547
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B58. MEAN HEIGHT IN ADULTS > 19 YEARS, VIET NAM GENERAL
NUTRITION SURVEY, 2009-2010 MEAN HEIGHT IN ADULTS > 19 YEARS,
BY SEX, AGE,ETHNICITY, ECOLOGICAL ZONE, URBAN/RURAL AREAS AND
HOUSEHOLD WEALTH, VIET NAM GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY, 2009-2010
Height (cm)
Background
Characteristic
Male
Female
Mean
Total
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
SD
N
7.53
3118
7.95
2218
7.57
2942
7.16
2992
7.55
2432
7.49
2381
6.95
1737
7.22
1317
7.31
848
8.14
530
8.64
1479
[95% CI]
Age groups
164.44
20-24
153.42
5.96
1433
163.91, 164.97
1007
163.78, 164.87
1440
163.11, 164.07
1528
163.22, 163.97
158.72, 159.44
1203
158.24, 159.04
1163
163.07, 163.94
158.52
5.61
1219
152.63, 154.02
162.93
158.15, 158.88
153.57
5.78
822
162.43, 163.44
158.24
4.97
915
152.71, 154.44
162.16
157.81, 158.66
152.95
5.88
648
161.19, 163.13
157.62
5.67
669
152.14, 153.77
161.21
156.92, 158.32
151.27
5.81
390
160.52, 161.91
155.84
5.46
458
150.39, 152.15
160.46
155.13, 156.56
149.9
6.09
244
159.55, 161.38
155.01
6.71
286
148.69, 151.11
158.3
154.09, 155.94
146.1
6.8
661
152.7
7.32
144.3, 147.91
819
152.09, 153.3
163
APPENDIX B
158.64
5.69
153.32
5.74
157.57, 159.03
1463
153.1, 154.26
163.5
> 70
159.08
5.19
1229
162.74, 163.88
65-69
158.15, 158.87
153.68
5.93
60-64
1502
153.94, 154.74
163.31
55-59
158.51
5.53
154.34
5.73
50-54
158.26, 159.21
151.72, 153.59
163.59
45-49
1211
152.66
5.87
40-44
158.74
5.55
152.65, 154.04
163.59
35-39
158.49, 159.5
153.34
6.46
30-34
1685
152.69, 154.15
164.32
24-29
158.99
5.32
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Height (cm)
Male
Background
Characteristic
Female
Mean
Total
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
SD
N
6.93
5365
[95% CI]
Ecological Zones
163.98
Red River Delta
153.58
5.3
2600
163.5, 164.46
Northern
midlands and
mountain areas
North Central
area and Central
coastal area
Central
Highlands
1458
162.13, 163.01
157.85
7.57
1507
152.79, 153.78
162.25
2433
161.85, 162.65
157.24
6.43
2596
152.11, 152.96
162.4
558
161.79, 163
582
1855
2187
162.97, 163.72
5.66
3449
7.01
4623
6.51
4440
9.87
3238
10.4
651
6.87
2758
9.6
1846
9.44
847
157.75, 158.91
154.23
5.62
1140
158.33
3.89
153.41, 154.2
163.34
8.98
156.76, 157.74
153.81
1594
5029
157.25
6.83
151.72, 152.91
4.83
8.17
156.9, 157.57
152.31
6.93
10.19 2964
157.4, 158.31
152.53
6.41
162.73, 164.47
APPENDIX B
158.04, 159.2
153.29
8.28
163.6
Mekong River
Delta
2765
152.92, 154.23
162.57
Southeast
158.62
5.39
158.54
5.36
2436
153.92, 154.54
158.21, 158.87
Ecological Zones (Old 8 zones)
164.05
Red river delta
153.58
5.05
2158
163.51, 164.59
1584
162.46, 163.62
315
160.69, 162.71
1361
161.66, 162.83
336
156.19, 157.99
157.64
5.59
1397
152.59, 153.72
162.15
157.18, 158.1
151.7
7.66
862
161.54, 162.77
156.58
7.17
984
151.03, 152.37
161.89
164
157.09
7.53
153.16
5.4
156.08, 157.08
151.37
7.15
161.31, 162.47
157.38, 158.92
152.12, 153.42
162.25
Central Highland
1654
152.77
9.01
Central South
158.15
7.8
152.54, 154.39
161.7
Central North
158.12, 159.23
153.47
7.63
North West
2282
153.04, 154.12
163.04
North East
158.67
4.92
410
156.46
7.05
150.64, 152.09
437
155.87, 157.05
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Height (cm)
Male
Background
Characteristic
Femal
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
N
1952
2216
2187
162.97, 163.72
6.29
4167
7.01
4623
6.83
5967
5.12
2339
7.63
3628
157.83, 158.82
154.23
5.62
N
158.33
4.4
153.4, 154.1
163.34
SD
[95% CI]
153.75
5.31
162.79, 164.25
Mekong river
delta
Mean
SD
[95% CI]
163.52
South East
Total
158.54
5.36
2436
153.92, 154.54
158.21, 158.87
Region
163.86
Total Urban
153.87
5.52
2840
163.24, 164.48
1114
163.07, 165.76
1726
157.69, 160.01
158.48
6.02
1902
153.09, 154.76
162.88
157.76, 159.2
153.25
6.38
7990
157.88
6.15
8613
153.07, 153.43
162.83
153.29
6.36
7168
162.62, 163.04
157.89
6.17
7696
153.11, 153.48
163.26
784
162.62, 163.9
8
14864
8.26
1658
157.71, 158.07
152.84
6.49
8.03 16603
157.72, 158.05
157.77
5.97
874
152.21, 153.47
157.25, 158.29
Ethnicity
163.36
Kinh
153.56
5.83
9501
163.13, 163.59
153.33, 153.79
162.21
Tay
271
161.29, 163.12
95
155.56, 158.35
169
100
10.9
195
9.6
344
151.54, 153.8
157.06
9.01
152.14, 153.41
536
152.67
8.34
152.78
6.57
10.91
156.85, 158.22
147.66, 149.49
161.51
160.2, 162.83
265
148.58
9.36
Thai
157.53
7.99
151.9, 153.6
156.96
7.35 19874
158.02, 158.46
152.75
8.93
H'mong
158.24
5.56 10373
175
156.46, 157.66
165
APPENDIX B
162.68, 163.08
Non-Poverty
Communes
1225
153.92
5.95
162.96, 164.05
Poverty communes
158.85
3.48
152.86, 154.73
163.5
Total Rural
158, 159.25
153.79
4.32
Small cities
3128
153.24, 154.5
164.41
Large Cities
158.63
5.09
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Height (cm)
Male
Background
Characteristic
Female
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
168
160.85, 163.47
102
63
154.46, 158.31
163.02
153.76
158.26
138
5.36
145
152.61, 154.91
158.65
Bana
24
156.02, 161.27
27
315
159.79, 163.11
7.03
283
8.18
51
10.28
630
8.67
3090
8.43
3660
7.79
4295
7.42
5102
6.81
6424
152.83, 154.99
152.37
8.64
128
153.91
6.27
147.53, 152.02
161.45
12.72
157.32, 159.21
149.78
6.3
186
156.38
8.29
150.44, 153.18
5.54
10.08
156.08, 158.26
157.81, 163.89
161.66, 164.37
342
157.17
6.96
65
9.19
155.9, 158.65
151.81
12.32
Kho me
APPENDIX B
174
151.68, 153.94
160.85
N
157.28
7.03
84
SD
[95% CI]
152.81
8.53
161.21, 163.68
All others ethnic
minorities
N
151.43, 153.72
162.44
Dao
SD
152.57
7.19
Nung
Mean
[95% CI]
162.16
Muong
Total
156.91
8.41
315
151.12, 153.63
155.55, 158.27
Household Wealth Index
161.03
Poorest (Q1)
152.46
7.3
1460
160.55, 161.51
1788
162.25, 162.9
2053
162.76, 163.48
2454
162.87, 163.68
2242
157.77, 158.36
158.12
5.48
2648
153.03, 153.64
164.36
157.82, 158.41
153.99
5.34
3074
163.84, 164.88
158.95
4.98
3349
153.45, 154.53
163.14
166
158.07
6.02
153.33
5.95
158.45, 159.46
153.42
6.2
162.91, 163.36
157.53, 158.14
153.09, 153.79
163.28
Viet Nam
1871
153.44
5.95
Richest (Q5)
157.84
6.79
152.93, 153.69
163.12
Richer (Q4)
156.13, 156.89
153.31
6.61
Middle (Q3)
1630
152.07, 152.86
162.57
Poorer (Q2)
156.51
6.91
10830
158.08
5.89 11741
153.2, 153.63
7.75 22570
157.87, 158.29
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table B59. MEAN WEIGHT IN ADULTS > 19 YEARS, VIET NAM GENERAL
NUTRITION SURVEY, 2009-2010 MEAN WEIGHT IN ADULTS > 19 YEARS,
BY SEX, AGE,ETHNICITY, ECOLOGICAL ZONE, URBAN/RURAL AREAS AND
HOUSEHOLD WEALTH, VIET NAM GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY, 2009-2010
Weight (kg)
Background
Characteristic
Male
Female
Mean
Total
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
SD
N
7.92
2216
8.27
3123
7.92
2953
8.06
2990
8.24
2433
8.44
2383
8.31
1744
7.99
1319
8.32
847
7.94
530
8.95
1483
7.3
5376
[95% CI]
Age groups
54.19
20-24
45.98
7.9
1006
53.44, 54.93
1433
54.72, 56.48
1441
55.06, 56.3
1527
55.12, 56.33
1463
52.19, 53.18
52.64
7.54
1205
52.16, 53.13
49.52
8.56
1159
54.97, 56.38
52.51
7.13
1225
54.97, 56.38
54.94
52.03, 52.99
50.72
8.28
828
54.13, 55.76
52.73
7.82
916
54.13, 55.76
54.42
51.93, 53.52
49.62
7.7
649
53.18, 55.67
51.99
7.6
670
53.18, 55.67
52.49
51.21, 52.76
47.66
8.22
389
50.67, 54.31
49.88
7.82
458
50.67, 54.31
51.02
48.77, 50.98
46.49
7.95
244
49.39, 52.65
48.58
7.33
286
49.39, 52.65
49.08
47.55, 49.61
43.35
8.36
656
48.1, 50.05
45.89
8.61
827
48.1, 50.05
45.01, 46.76
Ecological Zones
55.11
Red River Delta
47.49
7.14
54.16, 56.05
2608
51.19
5.92
46.65, 48.34
2768
50.29, 52.09
167
APPENDIX B
54.94, 56.22
55.67
> 70
52.68
6.77
1228
54.94, 56.22
65-69
51.38, 52.26
49.66
7.78
60-64
1513
55.12, 56.33
55.58
55-59
51.82
6.65
49.51
7.99
50-54
50.37, 51.55
55.06, 56.3
55.73
45-49
1690
48.15
7.29
40-44
50.96
5.84
54.72, 56.48
55.68
35-39
49.25, 50.16
47.03
8.35
30-34
1210
53.44, 54.93
55.6
25-29
49.7
5.54
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Weight (kg)
Background
Characteristic
Male
Female
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
Northern
midlands and
mountain areas
North Central
area and Central
coastal area
N
1459
53.86, 54.94
1507
2429
52.7, 54.13
49.88
7.25
2608
46.05, 47.13
53.71
558
53.06, 54.37
579
1595
55.32, 57.5
1869
2178
54.37, 55.66
6.66
3465
8.19
4619
6.89
4453
51.88, 53.77
49.82
8.05
1137
52.83
5.51
48.87, 50.67
55.02
8.67
49.92, 50.95
49.77
6.93
5037
50.43
7.43
46.6, 47.96
56.41
8.45
49.4, 50.36
47.28
8.24
10.15 2966
50.13, 51.04
46.59
8.09
N
50.58
8.18
46.46, 47.31
53.42
SD
[95% CI]
46.89
9.25
Southeast
Mean
SD
[95% CI]
54.4
Central Highlands
Mekong River
Delta
Total
52.27
7.58
2441
49.34, 50.3
51.79, 52.75
Ecological Zones (Old 8 zones)
55.17
Red river delta
47.49
6.86
2167
54.14, 56.2
APPENDIX B
1586
53.8, 55.56
315
52.53, 54.57
1359
51.83, 54.13
1406
410
52.37, 53.99
987
49.94
7.68
436
1953
55.34, 57.17
2228
2178
54.37, 55.66
7.34
4181
8.19
4619
7.81
5984
51.91, 53.52
49.82
8.05
845
52.71
6.14
48.82, 50.4
55.02
8.92
49.29, 50.59
49.61
7.55
10.11 1848
49.34, 50.81
46.08, 47.71
56.26
2765
50.07
8.64
46.89
8.54
6.8
48.67, 50.06
46.28, 47.87
53.18
651
49.36
5.65
860
9.78
49.27, 50.93
47.07
10.17
52.7, 54.33
Mekong river
delta
336
45.11, 46.64
53.52
South East
50.1
8
45.87
6.29
10.05 3239
49.8, 51.79
46.15, 47.6
52.98
Central Highland
1653
46.88
9.16
Central South
50.8
8.5
45.97, 48.17
53.55
Central North
50.33, 52.12
47.07
9.06
North West
2286
46.74, 48.24
54.68
North East
51.23
5.42
52.27
7.58
2441
49.34, 50.3
51.79, 52.75
Region
56.94
Total Urban
56.13, 57.76
168
49.96
7.82
2835
53.27
6.61
49.25, 50.68
3149
52.5, 54.04
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Weight (kg)
Male
Background
Characteristic
Female
Mean
Mean
SD
SD
N
[95% CI]
58.41
Large Cities
1113
1722
55.2, 56.79
7992
53.61, 54.29
1907
7167
53.39, 54.08
8623
787
54.8, 56.9
16615
50.35
7.18
7706
8.29 14873
50.09, 50.61
48.57
8.97
8.4
50.28, 50.77
46.89, 47.5
55.85
3629
50.52
7.25
47.2
7.95
8.58
51.73, 53.26
47.07, 47.63
53.73
2355
52.5
7.55
47.35
8.08
5.92
53.01, 55.92
48.57, 50.1
53.95
Total Rural
1242
49.33
8.33
N
54.47
4.75
49.61, 52.26
56
Small cities
SD
[95% CI]
50.93
6.12
56.91, 59.91
Non-Poverty
Communes
Mean
N
[95% CI]
Poverty
communes
Total
52.01
7.76
875
47.84, 49.29
9.18
1662
51.26, 52.77
Ethnicity
54.89
Kinh
48.18
7.95
9500
54.47, 55.3
47.84, 48.52
46.62 9.15
10.39
45.59, 47.65
51.5
96
50.5, 52.49
53.77
168
52.25, 54.53
52.95, 56.03
50.97, 54.87
53.12, 55.06
128
145
7.87
281
7.84
50
50.18, 52.82
48.27
6.15
44.76, 47.54
11.17
51.5
8.01
24
187
48.31, 51.16
46.15
8.47
47.69, 53.52
64
46.74, 51.41
50.61
11.07
49.74
9.21
136
341
49.45, 51.68
49.07
6.95
Bana
103
44.77, 48.22
54.09
8.74
50.56
9.46
65
344
49.16, 51.05
46.5
10.62
Kho me
173
45.98, 48.68
52.92
8.44
50.1
7.54
85
196
49.79, 51
47.33
10.54
Dao
175
46.03, 47.77
54.49
9.69
50.39
7.72
46.9
8.07
538
47.44, 49.29
46.37, 47.93
53.39
Nung
100
47.15
169
52.86, 54.67
Muong
50.32 11.16
48.37
8.75
44.21, 46.51
6.96
8.07 19906
51.04, 51.73
49.36, 51.28
45.36
8.22
Thai
266
51.38
272
52.74, 55.14
H'mong
1040
6
26
46.67, 49.88
169
APPENDIX B
53.94
Tay
6.9
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Weight (kg)
Male
Background
Characteristic
Female
Mean
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
All others ethnic minorities
Total
Mean
SD
N
[95% CI]
54.09
47.09
9.41
314
52.65, 55.53
SD
N
10.66
629
8.59
3102
8.39
3664
8.16
4298
7.91
5102
7.79
6433
[95% CI]
50.58
9.99
316
45.66, 48.52
49.28, 51.87
46.26
48.91
Household Wealth Index
51.9
Poorest (Q1)
8.18
1462
51.39, 52.4
1787
49.66
7.49
1877
52.4, 53.47
46.13, 46.94
49.28, 50.03
53.72
47.27
50.34
7.51
2049
53.22, 54.23
APPENDIX B
48.53, 49.3
46.53
7.74
Middle (Q3)
7.4
2250
46.82, 47.71
54.93
Richer (Q4)
49.99, 50.7
48.49
7.63
2451
51.58
6.96
2651
54.34, 55.51
47.95, 49.02
51.1, 52.07
57.65
49.95
53.63
Richest (Q5)
7.86
3078
6.22
3354
57.02, 58.28
49.44, 50.45
53.11, 54.15
54.73
48.05
51.25
Viet Nam
8.21 10827
54.36, 55.1
170
1640
45.83, 46.68
52.94
Poorer (Q2)
7.73
7.23 11773
47.74, 48.36
8.41 22600
50.94, 51.56
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX C: NUTRITIONAL STATUS OF MOTHERS
OF CHILDREN UNDER 5
Table C1. PREVALENCE OF CED IN MOTHERS OF CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
Maternal BMI
Ecological region Red river delta
>= 18,5 Kg/m2
< 18,5 Kg/m2
N
[95% CI]
N
[95% CI]
76.7 [75.68, 77.78]
11632
23.3 [22.22, 24.32]
3626
Northern central and coastal area
82.2 [81.19, 83.16]
15930
17.8 [16.84, 18.81]
3264
Central highlands
77.4 [76.22, 78.47]
13437
22.6 [21.53, 23.78]
3642
Southeast
83.7 [82.28, 85.06]
5494
16.3 [14.94, 17.72]
992
Mekong river delta
83.8 [82.62, 84.83]
6444
16.2 [15.17, 17.38]
1443
80.4 [79.64, 81.2]
14015
19.6 [18.8, 20.36]
3434
79.8 [79.4, 80.28]
66952
20.2 [19.72, 20.6]
16401
Total
Table C2. PREVALENCE OF CED IN MOTHERS OF CHILDREN UNDER 5
BY AGE GROUP
Maternal BMI
Age group
>= 18,5 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
N
< 18,5 Kg/m2
[95% CI]
N
15-19
76.5 [73.81; 78.91]
1324
23.5 [21.09; 26.19]
394
20-29
76.7 [76.16; 77.27]
37682
23.3 [22.73; 23.84]
10771
30-39
84 [83.38; 84.59]
24511
16 [15.41; 16.62]
4668
40-49
86.4 [85.08; 87.65]
3306
13.6 [12.35; 14.92]
536
Total
79.8 [79.39; 80.28]
66823
20.2 [19.72; 20.61]
16369
171
APPENDIX C
Northern midlands and
mountainous area
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX D, E: MICRONUTRIENT DEFICIENCIES
AND BREASTFEEDING PRACTICES
APPENDIX D - E
Table D1. PREVALENCE OF ANEMIA, AND VITAMIN A DEFICIENCY IN CHILDREN
BY ECOLOGICAL REGION
Total
% anemia
% Vitamin A def.
Red river delta
1202
23.5
9.1
Northeast
1580
34
13
Northwest
600
43
19.4
Northern Central
539
26.3
16.4
Southern Central
599
33.1
15.2
Central Highlands
545
26.4
20.9
Southeast
1538
22.8
10.3
Mekong river delta
1569
30.3
17
Total
8152
29.2
14.2
Table D2. BREASTFEEDING PRACTICES
Breastfeeding indicators
Percentages %
Initiation of BF within 1 hour after delivery
76.2
Colostrums given to the babies
70.8
Exclusive BF in the first 4 months
25.8
Exclusive BF in the first 6 months
19.6
Stop BF at :
< 12 mo.
12 mo.
13-24 mo.
>24 mo.
Bottle-feeding in children under 2
172
6.6
14.4
67.0
11.9
34.6
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table E1. COVERAGE OF VITAMIN A SUPPLEMENTATION
% coverage of Vit A in
children
% coverage of Vit A in
lactating mothers
83
73.5
Northeast
89.5
61.8
Northwest
94.6
75.2
Northern Central
88.8
79.2
Southern Central
88.1
69
Central Highlands
85.4
55.3
Southeast
87.2
60.7
Mekong river delta
84.3
57.9
Total
87
65.2
Region
Red river delta
APPENDIX D - E
173
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX F: HOUSEHOLD FOOD CONSUMPTION
Table F1. FOOD CONSUMPTION NATIONWIDE IN 2009-2010 (G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009 - 2010
Food groups
Mean
SD
Median
373.2 [367.88; 378.55]
138.5
372
2. Wheat flour
16.5 [15.16; 17.82]
33.3
0
3. Other foods
16.9 [15.55; 18.23]
32
0
1. Rice
4. Tubers
4.1 [3.29; 4.86]
20.3
0
5. Beans/peas
0.6 [0.53; 0.76]
4.2
0
18.9 [16.85; 20.98]
49.1
0
10
0
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
APPENDIX F
n = 8267
2.3 [1.95; 2.62]
8. Vegetables (leaves)
157.3 [152.92; 161.6]
105.1
145.3
9. Vegetables (tubers)
32.7 [30.7; 34.78]
60.7
1.6
10. Fruits
60 [55.19; 64.8]
103.6
0
11. Sugar
3.8 [3.39; 4.14]
8
0
13.6 [12.95; 14.33]
12.5
10
13. Fat
2.5 [2.1; 2.81]
7.4
0
14. Oil
5.8 [5.45; 6.24]
10.3
1.3
84 [80.02; 87.98]
89.9
51.6
13.2 [12.31; 14.02]
26.3
0
2.7 [2.36; 3.1]
9.6
0
18. Fresh milk
16.4 [14.33; 18.41]
42.6
0
19. Fishes
59.8 [56.81; 62.74]
72.3
39
9.6 [8.75; 10.45]
23.9
0
12. Sauces
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
20. Other Aqua foods
174
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F2. FOOD CONSUMPTION RED RIVER DELTA REGION IN 2009-2010
(6 ZONES) (G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009 - 2010
Food groups
n = 1410
SD
Median
369,1 [357,16; 381,11]
128,5
361,8
2. Wheat flour
14,2 [11,83;16,56]
27,3
0
3. Other foods
14,7 [12,32; 17,05]
28,5
0
4,9 [2,97; 6,88]
22,3
0
0,7 [0,43; 0,9]
4
0
34,3 [28,49; 40,07]
64,6
0
3,2 [2,37; 4,1]
11,6
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
176,3 [169,29; 183,26]
93,6
166,4
9. Vegetables (tubers)
27,9 [22,71; 33,14]
55,8
0,8
10. Fruits
84 [72,35; 95,62]
119,4
5,8
11. Sugar
1,5 [0,85; 2,11]
6,4
0
13,5 [12,48; 14,61]
11,3
11,5
13. Fat
3,4 [2,57; 4,28]
9,6
0
14. Oil
4,1 [3,45; 4,66]
7,8
0
108,3 [102,16; 114,49]
86
98
18,6 [16,51; 20,7]
28,6
0
2,2 [1,63; 2,83]
7,6
0
15,5 [13,52; 17,53]
35
0
1. Rice
4. Tubers
5. Beans/peas
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
12. Sauces
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
18. Fresh milk
19. Fishes
42 [36,82; 47,25]
66,5
0
20. Other Aqua foods
10,7 [8,7; 12,66]
23,9
0
APPENDIX F
Mean
175
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F3. FOOD CONSUMPTION NORTHERN MIDLANDS AND MOUNTAIN
REGION IN 2009-2010 (6 ZONES) (G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
Mean
SD
Median
404.8 [390.71; 418.88]
144.6
401.4
2. Wheat flour
13.4 [10.4; 16.43]
33.2
0
3. Other foods
14.7 [11.83; 17.51]
33.9
0
4. Tubers
3.5 [2.14; 4.85]
19.1
0
5. Beans/peas
0.6 [0.37; 0.86]
4.7
0
37 [32.71; 41.35]
65.3
0
5 [4.1; 5.81]
14.7
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
208.6 [198.16; 219.05]
119.5
190.2
9. Vegetables (tubers)
32.1
64.4
0
10. Fruits
36.2 [30.2; 42.14]
73.2
0
11. Sugar
0.7 [0.5; 0.92]
4
0
10.3 [9.39; 11.29]
10.7
7.5
13. Fat
6.7 [5.94; 7.43]
9.6
4.8
14. Oil
1.7 [0.98; 2.46]
8.8
0
91.9 [82.66; 101.18]
96.6
66.7
16. Eggs
13 [11.4; 14.5]
25.2
0
17. Milk powder/cheese
0.6 [0.37; 0.79]
4
0
9.1 [4.86; 13.31]
35.4
0
29.8 [25.67; 33.89]
59.3
0
14
0
1. Rice
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
APPENDIX F
n = 2007
12. Sauces
15. Meats
18. Fresh milk
19. Fishes
20. Other Aqua foods
176
3.1 [1.95; 4.27]
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F4: FOOD CONSUMPTION NORTH CENTRAL AREA AND CENTRAL
COASTAL REGION IN 2009-2010 (G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
n = 2037
Mean
1. Rice
394.6 [382.69; 406.5]
SD
Median
137.3
371.1
17.4 [14.86;19.87]
38
0
3. Other foods
17.4 [14.96; 19.92]
34
0
3 [1.56; 4.53]
18
0
1.1 [0.77; 1.44]
5.1
0
10.9 [6.86; 14.92]
36.5
0
2.8 [1.92; 3.71]
11.3
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
139.3 [133.07; 145.52]
88.7
121.8
9. Vegetables (tubers)
23.7 [20.65; 26.77]
45.5
2.1
10. Fruits
40.6 [33.68; 47.48]
80.8
0
11. Sugar
3.9 [3.31; 4.47]
7.5
0.7
17.9 [15.63; 20.14]
14.2
11.5
13. Fat
2.3 [1.13; 3.42]
7.4
0
14. Oil
7.9 [7.05; 8.76]
11.5
5.2
15. Meats
56.7 [50.1; 63.27]
73.5
21.5
16. Eggs
10.9 [9.56; 12.26]
21.9
0
1.4 [0.97; 1.89]
6.5
0
12.7 [10.16; 15.2]
35.1
0
78.6 [71.86; 85.44]
71
73
19.1
0
4. Tubers
5. Beans/peas
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
12. Sauces
17. Milk powder/cheese
18. Fresh milk
19. Fishes
20. Other Aqua foods
7.5 [6.21; 8.77]
APPENDIX F
2. Wheat flour
177
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F5. FOOD CONSUMPTION CENTRAL HIGHLANDS REGION IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
Mean
SD
Median
438.3 [406.66; 469.87]
164.3
419.5
2. Wheat flour
10.3 [8; 13]
25.1
0
3. Other foods
10.8 [8.2; 13.32]
25.2
0
2.1 [0.86; 3.25]
12.7
0
0.2 [-0.03; 0.52]
3.4
0
11.4 [7.69; 15.21]
36.3
0
1.1 [0.42; 1.74]
6.3
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
141.2 [128.19; 154.26]
93.9
140.7
9. Vegetables (tubers)
29.8 [23.5; 36.08]
55.1
1.4
10. Fruits
21.5 [15.03; 28.01]
60.1
0
11. Sugar
1.3 [0.83; 1.74]
3.5
0
13.7 [12.1; 15.26]
9.9
13.3
13. Fat
1 [0.19; 1.75]
4.1
0
14. Oil
11.8 [9.85; 13.79]
15.7
8.8
81.7 [62.69; 100.65]
95.2
50
9.7 [7.16; 12.29]
19.3
0
1.1 [0.24; 1.94]
7.1
0
18. Fresh milk
10.8 [6.87; 14.7]
32.7
0
19. Fishes
46 [40.82; 51.24]
53.3
42.5
4.9 [3.63; 6.14]
15.2
0
1. Rice
4. Tubers
5. Beans/peas
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
APPENDIX F
n = 591
12. Sauces
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
20. Other Aqua foods
178
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F6. FOOD CONSUMPTION SOUTHEAST REGION IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
n = 705
Mean
Median
309 [296.75; 321.33]
125.3
314.4
2. Wheat flour
23.8 [18.28;29.36]
36.5
0
3. Other foods
23.6 [17.45; 29.66]
35.4
0
2.8 [0.74; 4.92]
15.8
0
0.2 [0.1; 0.37]
2.3
0
12.4 [5.15; 19.58]
38.9
0
0.3 [0.05; 0.47]
2.3
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
168.4 [149.17; 187.66]
109
160.3
9. Vegetables (tubers)
36.6 [29.36; 43.76]
67.1
4
10. Fruits
98.9 [80.35; 117.52]
126.3
2.5
11. Sugar
4.8 [3.3; 6.38]
8.8
2.3
12. Sauces
10 [8.68; 11.22]
10.1
8.9
13. Fat
0.2 [0.04; 0.34]
2
0
14. Oil
7.7 [6.2; 9.17]
10
4.7
103.7 [87.71; 119.65]
96.6
83.3
15.2 [12; 18.47]
29.6
0
7 [5.3; 8.71]
13.8
0
37 [26.54; 47.37]
66.2
0
19. Fishes
64.9 [52.81; 77.05]
75.2
55
20. Other Aqua foods
15.3 [12.35; 18.21]
30.6
0
1. Rice
4. Tubers
5. Beans/peas
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
18. Fresh milk
APPENDIX F
SD
179
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F7. FOOD CONSUMPTION MEKONG RIVER DELTA REGION IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
Năm 2009-2010
Food groups
n = 1517
Mean
SD
Median
365.3 [356.68; 373.9]
128.4
343.4
2. Wheat flour
16.1 [13.79; 18.4]
32.2
0
3. Other foods
16.9 [14.77; 19.04]
30.1
0
6.3 [4.39; 8.14]
25.4
0
5. Beans/peas
0.6 [0.32; 0.8]
4
0
6. Tofu
5 [3.42; 6.59]
22.8
0
0.7 [0.38; 1.02]
5.5
0
105.3
98.6
1. Rice
4. Tubers
APPENDIX F
7. Nuts / Sesame
8. Vegetables (leaves)
116.4 [108.73; 124.09]
9. Vegetables (tubers)
47.7 [44.1; 51.21]
72
5.7
10. Fruits
48.8 [41.33; 56.25]
97.2
0
11. Sugar
8.3 [7.58; 8.98]
10.1
5.3
12. Sauces
13.9 [12.7; 15.1]
13.8
10.5
13. Fat
0.9 [0.68; 1.2]
4.4
0
14. Oil
5.1 [4.38; 5.82]
8.9
1.3
15. Meats
65.9 [59.5; 72.34]
88.1
25.5
16. Eggs
8.6 [6.92; 10.28]
26.4
0
3.3 [2.57; 4.03]
12.5
0
11.4 [8.34; 14.44]
36.1
0
78.9 [72.95; 84.79]
77.9
69.5
11.8 [9.75; 13.94]
28.3
0
17. Milk powder/cheese
18. Fresh milk
19. Fishes
20. Other Aqua foods
180
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F8. FOOD CONSUMPTION RURAL AREA IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
Năm 2009-2010
Food groups
n = 6613
SD
Median
388.3 [380.19; 396.35]
140
378.8
2. Wheat flour
13.1 [11.86;14.33]
29.5
0
3. Other foods
13.5 [12.34; 14.64]
28.2
0
4. Tubers
3.9 [3.01; 4.73]
19.8
0
5. Beans/peas
0.7 [0.51; 0.79]
4.1
0
18.6 [15.87; 21.41]
49.6
0
2.5 [2.02; 2.94]
10.5
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
154.3 [148.66; 159.89]
104.5
145
9. Vegetables (tubers)
31.1 [28.62; 33.55]
59.6
1.2
10. Fruits
49.5 [43.84; 55.23]
94
0
11. Sugar
3.5 [3; 3.97]
7.4
0
14.8 [13.7; 15.9]
13.2
10.5
13. Fat
3 [2.48; 3.53]
8.2
0
14. Oil
5.4 [4.83; 5.88]
10.1
0
15. Meats
75.7 [71.62; 79.72]
85.6
50
16. Eggs
12.7 [11.61; 13.74]
25.5
0
1.9 [1.54; 2.21]
8.6
0
18. Fresh milk
12.3 [10.48; 14.14]
35.8
0
19. Fishes
60.6 [56.61; 64.57]
72.7
40
7.9 [6.86; 8.92]
21.9
0
1. Rice
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
12. Sauces
17. Milk powder/cheese
20. Other Aqua foods
APPENDIX F
Mean
181
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F9. FOOD CONSUMPTION URBAN AREA IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
Mean
SD
Median
330.3 [317.13; 343.47]
124.5
333.3
2. Wheat flour
26.2 [22.85;29.47]
40.7
0
3. Other foods
26.9 [23.57; 30.23]
39.4
0
4. Tubers
4.6 [2.67; 6.62]
21.8
0
5. Beans/peas
0.6 [0.35; 0.92]
4.2
0
19.7 [14.3; 25.11]
47.7
0
1.7 [0.83; 2.63]
8.5
0
1. Rice
6. Tofu
7. Nuts / Sesame
APPENDIX F
n = 1604
8. Vegetables (leaves)
165.8 [154.12; 177.45]
106.3
147.3
9. Vegetables (tubers)
37.4 [32.15; 42.74]
63.4
5
10. Fruits
89.8 [73.09; 106.53]
122
4.5
11. Sugar
4.6 [3.33; 5.88]
9.5
1.3
10.3 [9.19; 11.48]
9.6
9
12. Sauces
13. Fat
0.9 [0.53; 1.27]
4
0
14. Oil
7.3 [6.2; 8.31]
10.8
4.2
107.7 [97.42; 118.06]
97.5
80
14.6 [12.32; 16.8]
28.4
0
5.2 [3.88; 6.44]
11.7
0
18. Fresh milk
27.9 [20.82; 35.06]
56.2
0
19. Fishes
57.4 [49.78; 64.96]
70.9
36.3
20. Other Aqua foods
14.5 [12.46; 16.47]
28.4
0
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
182
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F10. FOOD CONSUMPTION POVERTY COMMUNES IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
n = 1309
Mean
SD
Median
407.7 [391.36; 423.95]
158.8
412.5
2. Wheat flour
3.7 [2.24; 5.14]
18.3
0
3. Other foods
4.3 [3.09; 5.45]
18
0
4. Tubers
0.4 [0; 0.72]
5.5
0
5. Beans/peas
0.1[0; 0.12]
1.1
0
6. Tofu
8 [5.44; 10.52]
34.7
0
7. Nuts / Sesame
1.6 [0.79; 2.39]
9.6
0
1. Rice
169.9 [157.22; 182.48]
118.2
170
9. Vegetables (tubers)
13.8 [10.48; 17.17]
46.7
0
10. Fruits
10.8 [6.66; 15.01]
48.7
0
11. Sugar
1.1[0.08; 2.11]
6.6
0
11.7 [9.81; 13.51]
13.6
6.7
13. Fat
2.8 [2.11; 3.57]
7.2
0
14. Oil
1.5 [1.04; 1.91]
5.8
0
58.2 [49.21; 67.14]
89
0
6.4 [4.19; 8.71]
21.1
0
0.6 [0.14; 1.1]
4.6
0
3.4 [1.31; 5.47]
19.8
0
42.3 [35.51; 49.04]
67.9
0
2.5 [1.11; 3.82]
13.3
0
12. Sauces
15. Meats
16. Eggs
17. Milk powder/cheese
18. Fresh milk
19. Fishes
20. Other Aqua foods
APPENDIX F
8. Vegetables (leaves)
183
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F11. FOOD CONSUMPTION NON-POVERTY COMMUNES IN 2009-2010
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
2009-2010
Food groups
n = 6958
Mean
SD
Median
368 [359.92; 376.11]
134.4
364.8
2. Wheat flour
18.4 [16.7; 20.14]
34.6
0
3. Other foods
18.8 [17.09; 20.46]
33.1
0
4. Tubers
4.6 [3.71; 5.56]
21.6
0
5. Beans/peas
0.7 [0.59; 0.88]
4.4
0
20.6 [17.86; 23.27]
50.7
0
2.4 [1.96; 2.82]
10.1
0
8. Vegetables (leaves)
155.4 [150.05; 160.67]
102.9
141.6
9. Vegetables (tubers)
35.6 [33.06; 38.12]
62
2.9
10. Fruits
67.4 [59.98; 74.85]
107.6
0
11. Sugar
4.2 [3.67; 4.67]
8.1
0
13.9 [12.96; 14.92]
12.3
10.8
13. Fat
2.4 [1.94; 2.85]
7.5
0
14. Oil
6.5 [5.98; 7.03]
10.7
3
15. Meats
87.9 [82.98; 92.82]
89.4
64
16. Eggs
14.2 [13.09; 15.27]
26.8
0
3 [2.5; 3.59]
10.1
0
18. Fresh milk
18.3 [15.48; 21.18]
44.8
0
19. Fishes
62.4 [58.64; 66.12]
72.6
47.5
10.7 [9.54; 11.81]
25
0
1. Rice
6. Tofu
APPENDIX F
7. Nuts / Sesame
12. Sauces
17. Milk powder/cheese
20. Other Aqua foods
184
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F12. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE NATIONWIDE
IN 2009-2010 (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Nationwwide
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 8267
SD
Median
1925.4 [1901.54; 949.28]
587.1
1880.4
Total Protein (g)
74.3 [73.14; 75.49]
26.5
69.6
Animal Protein (g)
30.6 [29.58; 31.54]
21.1
25.5
38.5 [37.7; 39.26]
17.9
38.3
37.7 [36.57; 38.82]
23.4
32.1
14.5 [14; 15.02]
12.3
11
56.8 [55.83; 57.76]
26.1
58.5
506.2 [492.75; 519.7]
301.3
418.2
0.6 [0.56; 0.58]
0.3
0.5
12.3 [12.14; 12.52]
4.7
11.6
146.7 [137.38; 156.01]
233.6
40.8
5895.6 [5688.65; 102.46]
5264.8
5088.8
753.3 [718.29; 788.35]
598.4
656.7
Protein
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Total (g)
Vegetable Fat (g)
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.1 [1.07; 1.12]
0.6
0.9
B2 (mg)
0.7 [0.7; 0.74]
0.4
0.6
B3 (mg)
14.3 [14.08; 14.59]
6.9
12.8
C (mg)
85.1 [82.04; 88.19]
75.4
61.4
0.6 [0.56; 0.58]
0.3
0.5
Protein
15.4 [15.2; 16.22]
3.7
15.2
Fat
17.6 [17.41; 18.5]
8.7
16.4
67 [66.1; 69.49]
10.2
70.4
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Carbohydrate
185
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F13. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE RED RIVER DELTA
REGION IN 2009-2010 (6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Red River Delta region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 1410
SD
Median
1903.8 [1850.88; 956.64]
545.8
1859.9
75.3 [72.71; 77.9]
25.1
70.9
29.8 [27.43; 32.25]
19.4
25.6
0.4 [0.36; 0.4]
0.2
0.4
Total (g)
40.4 [38.55; 42.27]
21.6
36.6
Vegetable Fat (g)
13.3 [12.28; 14.32]
12.4
8.8
0.7 [0.64; 0.68]
0.2
0.7
279.7
453.5
0.6 [0.57; 0.61]
0.3
0.5
13.2 [12.76; 13.58]
4.8
12.3
191.8 [169.02; 214.57]
263.1
101.7
Caroten (μg)
8140.5 [7660.3; 8620.71]
5470.9
7746.8
A_RA (μg)
1044.2 [991.63; 1096.67]
636.2
986.2
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Animal Protein (g)
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
APPENDIX F
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
Iron (mg)
526.5 [507.6; 545.41]
Vitamins
A (μg)
B1 (mg)
0.7 [0.71; 0.77]
0.5
0.7
B2 (mg)
13.4 [12.9; 13.85]
0.4
12.1
B3 (mg)
102.7 [95.72; 109.67]
5.7
79.6
0.6 [0.61; 0.64]
77.2
0.6
191.8 [169.02; 214.57]
0.2
101.7
Protein
15.9 [15.89; 16.82]
3.3
15.7
Fat
19.1 [18.66; 20.41]
8.2
18.9
65 [64.5; 67.71]
9.5
67.5
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Carbohydrate
186
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F14: NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE NORTHERN MIDLANDS
AND MOUNTAIN REGION IN 2009-2010 (6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Northern midlands and mountain region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
2035 [1989.73; 2080.31]
n = 2007
SD
Median
568.5
1983.8
73 [70.95; 75]
25
70.1
23.4 [20.87; 25.86]
20
20.3
0.3 [0.27; 0.31]
0.2
0.3
Total (g)
41.3 [39.73; 42.89]
22.4
37.1
Vegetable Fat (g)
13.6 [12.66; 14.56]
11.9
9.3
0.6 [0.62; 0.66]
0.2
0.7
217.2
399.6
0.5 [0.51; 0.53]
0.2
0.5
13.1 [12.73; 13.4]
4.6
12.3
127.7 [113.12; 142.24]
204.1
27.6
Caroten (μg)
9111.1 [8601.84; 620.34]
6104.8
7888.8
A_RA (μg)
1078.5 [1017.32; 1139.6]
642
969.5
B1 (mg)
1.2 [1.12; 1.2]
0.5
1
B2 (mg)
0.7 [0.67; 0.71]
0.3
0.6
B3 (mg)
14.2 [13.71; 14.73]
6.5
12.6
103.8 [96.57; 111.01]
79.4
79.6
0.6 [0.55; 0.59]
0.2
0.5
14.4 [14.2; 15.3]
3.3
14.3
Fat
18.2 [17.91; 19.53]
8.1
17.9
Carbohydrate
67.4 [66.93; 70.36]
9.8
69.8
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Animal Protein (g)
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
449.1 [433.12; 465.04]
Vitamins
A (μg)
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Protein
187
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F15. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE NORTH CENTRAL AREA
AND CENTRAL COASTAL REGION IN 2009-2010
(6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
North Central area and Central coastal region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 2037
SD
Median
1868.4 [1826.63; 1910.2]
569.2
1756.9
70.1 [67.74; 72.48]
24.8
65.6
28.7 [27.1; 30.34]
18.9
25.8
0.4 [0.37; 0.4]
0.2
0.4
Total (g)
33.8 [31.86; 35.81]
21.3
25.7
Vegetable Fat (g)
15.8 [14.67; 16.97]
13
12.1
0.5 [0.46; 0.51]
0.3
0.4
237.6
400.6
0.2
0.5
11.4 [11.13; 11.66]
4
10.6
92.8 [84.33; 101.31]
140.6
25.5
5166.1 [4772.62; 559.49]
4155.8
3656.6
625.9 [573.12; 678.66]
456.4
470.2
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Animal Protein (g)
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
APPENDIX F
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
Iron (mg)
467.4 [450.7; 484.18]
0.6 [0.55; 0.58]
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
0.9 [0.88; 0.95]
0.5
0.8
B2 (mg)
0.6 [0.61; 0.66]
0.3
0.6
B3 (mg)
15.4 [14.77; 15.96]
7.9
13.8
C (mg)
67.8 [62.05; 73.63]
62
44.1
0.5 [0.47; 0.51]
0.2
0.4
15 [14.13; 15.89]
3.4
15.3
Fat
16.3 [15.55; 17.53]
8.2
14.2
Carbohydrate
68.7 [68.54; 71.86]
9.4
72.6
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Protein
188
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F16. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE CENTRAL HIGHLANDS
REGION IN 2009-2010 (6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Central Highlands region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 591
SD
Median
2020.9 [1862.51; 179.22]
658.3
1978.7
Total Protein (g)
68.9 [63.62; 74.24]
24.9
67
Animal Protein (g)
25.7 [22.21; 29.15]
18.2
23.2
0.4 [0.31; 0.38]
0.2
0.4
Total (g)
38.2 [33.53; 42.94]
24.8
33.3
Vegetable Fat (g)
18.7 [16.84; 20.53]
13.2
15.6
0.4 [0.39; 0.48]
0.3
0.4
214.8
376.2
0.5 [0.47; 0.53]
0.2
0.5
11.4 [10.55; 12.24]
4.3
11.3
100.2 [79.39; 120.97]
192.8
21.2
4716.1 [4134.12; 298.02]
4286.6
4582.3
604.3 [521.27; 687.38]
482.2
602.2
Protein
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
403.9 [373.48; 434.24]
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.1 [0.94; 1.17]
0.6
1
B2 (mg)
0.6 [0.58; 0.69]
0.3
0.6
B3 (mg)
14.5 [13.23; 15.71]
7.2
13.2
74 [65.98; 81.92]
74.1
61.1
0.5 [0.47; 0.56]
0.2
0.5
13.7 [13.59; 14.54]
2.6
14
17 [15.32; 19.72]
9.6
15.6
69.3 [68.49; 73.58]
10.7
72.5
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Protein
Fat
Carbohydrate
189
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F17. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE IN SOUTHEAST REGION
IN 2009 (6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Southeast region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 705
SD
Median
1860.4 [1785.45; 935.34]
588.5
1813.1
80.1 [75.64; 84.61]
29.1
75.8
39.2 [35.5; 42.98]
24.2
34.8
0.5 [0.43; 0.49]
0.2
0.5
43.1 [37.47; 48.79]
28
37.2
15.4 [13.37; 17.4]
11.9
13
0.6 [0.57; 0.63]
0.2
0.6
407.8
482.7
0.3
0.5
5
11.9
200.3 [156.73; 243.89]
264.8
96
4801.7 [4236.5; 5366.95]
4620.6
4714.1
667.8 [585.04; 750.48]
545.9
610.2
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Animal Protein (g)
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Total (g)
Vegetable Fat (g)
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
APPENDIX F
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
Iron (mg)
589.9 [514.14; 665.73]
0.6 [0.56; 0.65]
12.6 [11.83; 13.4]
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.2 [1.11; 1.36]
0.7
1.1
B2 (mg)
0.9 [0.85; 1.04]
0.5
0.8
B3 (mg)
15.8 [14.82; 16.7]
7.2
14.2
99.6 [90.12; 109.03]
82
76.1
0.7 [0.63; 0.71]
0.3
0.6
Protein
17.2 [16.26; 18.45]
4.3
16.9
Fat
20.8 [19.13; 23.00]
9.4
19.5
62 [61.98; 66.26]
10.4
66
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Carbohydrate
190
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F18. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE IN MEKONG DELTA
REGION IN 2009-2010 (6 ZONES) (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Mekong River Delta region
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 1558
SD
Median
1970.1 [1921.41; 018.86]
628.3
1901.1
75.9 [74.14; 77.67]
28.2
71.6
33 [31.62; 34.35]
21.7
30
0.4 [0.4; 0.42]
0.2
0.4
32.2 [30.54; 33.78]
22.4
27.8
13.2 [12.41; 14]
11.2
9.6
0.5 [0.51; 0.54]
0.3
0.6
340.2
433.6
0.6 [0.55; 0.59]
0.3
0.5
12 [11.64; 12.27]
5.2
11
139.4 [121.78; 157.1]
265.2
34.7
3090.7 [2819.48; 361.89]
3984.8
1118.5
441 [402.41; 479.52]
476.2
275.4
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Animal Protein (g)
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Total (g)
Vegetable Fat (g)
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
528.4 [508.37; 548.46]
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.1 [1.01; 1.1]
0.6
0.9
B2 (mg)
0.7 [0.62; 0.68]
0.4
0.6
B3 (mg)
13.2 [12.81; 13.57]
6.5
11.7
C (mg)
63.7 [58.71; 68.59]
69.1
42.6
0.5 [0.51; 0.56]
0.3
0.4
Protein
15.3 [14.66; 16.19]
3.7
15.4
Fat
14.7 [14.16; 15.67]
8.3
13.8
70 [69.13; 72.85]
9.7
72.7
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Carbohydrate
191
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F19. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE IN RURAL AREA
IN 2009-2010 (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Rural area
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
1949.7 [1920.98; 978.41]
n = 6663
SD
Median
590.2
1898.8
Protein
Total Protein (g)
73.1 [71.88; 74.28]
26
68.9
Animal Protein (g)
28.6 [27.55; 29.69]
20.2
24.3
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
36.6 [35.66; 37.54]
17.7
37
36.2 [34.87; 37.46]
22.3
31.2
14.1 [13.48; 14.8]
12.4
10.5
56.3 [54.83; 57.77]
26.7
58.2
492.2 [479.79; 504.57]
280.3
413.9
0.6 [0.55; 0.58]
0.3
0.5
12.2 [11.99; 12.42]
4.6
11.6
137.8 [127.05; 148.55]
228.9
34.2
6116.3 [5759.73; 472.77]
5409.8
5229.1
766.7 [725.89; 807.48]
605.7
661.4
Fat
Total (g)
Vegetable Fat (g)
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
APPENDIX F
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
Iron (mg)
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.1 [1.03; 1.08]
0.6
0.9
B2 (mg)
0.7 [0.65; 0.69]
0.4
0.6
B3 (mg)
14.1 [13.72; 14.37]
6.8
12.6
C (mg)
81.4 [77.55; 85.24]
73
59.8
0.5 [0.53; 0.56]
0.2
0.5
13.8 [13.47; 14.38]
3.4
14.9
16 [15.52; 16.54]
8.4
15.8
70.2 [69.58; 70.73]
9.7
71.3
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Protein
Fat
Carbohydrate
192
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F20: NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE IN URBAN AREA
IN 2009-2010 (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Urban area
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 1604
SD
Median
1853.7 [1803.47; 903.95]
571.8
1809.5
78 [74.46; 81.44]
27.6
72.8
Animal Protein (g)
36.3 [33.33; 39.27]
22.7
31
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
44.1 [42.03; 46.06]
17.2
44.3
42.2 [39.3; 45.09]
26.1
36.4
Vegetable Fat (g)
15.6 [14.51; 16.72]
12
12.7
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
58.3 [55.72; 60.79]
24.5
59.6
547.7 [502.57; 592.82]
353
438.1
0.6 [0.55; 0.61]
0.3
0.5
12.7 [12.14; 13.26]
5.2
11.6
173 [144.1; 201.83]
245.1
68.7
5244 [4676.74; 5811.19]
4753.4
4648.4
714.7 [645.22; 784.23]
575.3
631.4
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Fat
Total (g)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1.2 [1.12; 1.27]
0.6
1
B2 (mg)
0.8 [0.78; 0.91]
0.4
0.7
B3 (mg)
15.2 [14.55; 15.8]
7
13.5
96.1 [87.28; 104.92]
81.3
68
0.7 [0.62; 0.68]
0.3
0.6
Protein
16.5 [15.94; 16.94]
4.1
16.5
Fat
19.7 [18.63; 20.74]
9.1
19
Carbohydrate
64.8 [63.39; 66.16]
10.4
66.8
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
193
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F21: NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE BY POVERTY
COMMUNES IN 2009-2010 (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Poverty communes
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 1309
SD
Median
1866,7 [1806,71; 926,59]
625,6
1838,7
Total Protein (g)
64 [61,49; 66,44]
24,6
59,2
Animal Protein (g)
21,1 [18,9; 23,2]
20,2
14,1
28,8 [26,42; 31,09]
21,5
24,9
Total (g)
25,2 [23,3; 27]
19,5
18,8
Vegetable Fat (g)
8,2 [7,57; 8,84]
8,1
5,6
54,7 [51,68; 57,76]
31,5
58,6
412,2 [390,58; 433,75]
238,9
361,6
0,5 [0,52; 0,56]
0,3
0,5
11,3 [10,79; 11,7]
4,6
10,8
72,5 [56,98; 87,95]
168,8
2,7
7348,6 [6677,82; 019,47]
6302,6
6202,6
698,8 [600,24; 797,37]
586,4
660,7
Protein
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
APPENDIX F
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
Iron (mg)
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
0,9 [0,87; 0,97]
0,5
0,8
B2 (mg)
0,6 [0,54; 0,61]
0,4
0,5
B3 (mg)
12,7 [12,18; 13,3]
6,4
11,5
C (mg)
79,1 [71,09; 87,12]
79,9
54,9
0,5 [0,47; 0,51]
0,2
0,4
Protein
11,7 [10,79; 13,67]
3,9
13,1
Fat
11,3 [10,52; 12,22]
7,9
9,9
77 [75,9; 78,07]
9,8
78,8
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Carbohydrate
194
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F22: NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE BY NON-POVERTY
COMMUNES IN 2009-2010 (PER CAPITA PER DAY)
Non-Poverty Communes
Nutrient
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
n = 6958
SD
Median
1934,3 [1909,15; 1959,4]
580,6
1885,7
75,9 [74,49; 77,25]
26,4
71,4
Animal Protein (g)
32 [30,69; 33,31]
20,8
27,4
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
40 [38,94; 40,96]
16,8
39,7
Total (g)
39,6 [38,23; 40,94]
23,4
34,4
Vegetable Fat (g)
15,5 [14,88; 16,05]
12,6
12,2
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
57,1 [55,84; 58,38]
25,2
58,5
520,4 [504,05; 536,76]
307,1
431,6
0,6 [0,56; 0,58]
0,3
0,5
12,5 [12,27; 12,71]
4,7
11,7
157,9 [145,66; 170,12]
239,9
58,5
5676,4 [5382,64; 970,24]
5054,3
4933,9
758,1 [720,99; 795,18]
599,2
655,7
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Fat
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
APPENDIX F
Iron (mg)
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
A_RA (μg)
B1 (mg)
1,1 [1,09; 1,15]
0,6
1
B2 (mg)
0,7 [0,71; 0,77]
0,4
0,7
B3 (mg)
14,6 [14,25; 14,9]
6,9
13,1
86 [81,9; 90,15]
74,7
62,5
0,6 [0,57; 0,6]
0,3
0,5
16 [15,48; 16,49]
3,6
15,5
Fat
17,3 [17,06; 18,34]
8,5
17,4
Carbohydrate
66,7 [66,05; 67,38]
9,8
69,2
C (mg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
Protein
195
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F23. ANIMAL FOOD CONSUMPTION BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
(6 ZONES) (G/CAPITA/DAY)
Meats
Animal food
Other aqua
foods
Fishes
MEAN ±
SD
Red River Delta region
107.8 ±
72.6
42.2
±
56.5
10.6
±
20.2
35.8
±
37.6
Vùng núi và cao nguyên
phía Bắc
91.6
± 131.9
29.9
±
81.1
3.2
±
20.1
20.3
±
46.2
Bắc Miền Trung và ven
biển Miền Trung
54.7
±
72.4
78.6
±
73.4
7.5
±
20.2
23.8
±
42.6
Central Highlands region
81.2
± 107.5
46.2
±
61.2
4.9
±
17.4
21.8
±
45.3
Southeast region
102.7 ±
71.8
64.7
±
56.4
15.2
±
22.6
49.5
±
43.6
Mekong River Delta
region
67.1
±
84.9
78.8
±
75.2
11.5
±
26.6
21.3
±
36.3
Nationwide
83.2
±
89
59.8
±
72.4
9.5
±
23.8
29.5
±
44.6
Ecological regions
MEAN ±
SD
MEAN ±
SD
Eggs/milk
MEAN ±
SD
APPENDIX F
Table F24. ANIMAL FOOD CONSUMPTION BY ECOLOGICAL REGIONS
(8 ZONES) (G/CAPITA/DAY)
Animal food
Meats
Other aqua
foods
Fishes
MEAN ±
SD
Red River Delta region
109.7 ±
68.9
40.4
±
52.2
11.3
±
20
37
±
36.3
North-East region
97.1
123
29.9
±
76.6
4.1
±
19.9
24.7
±
46.9
North-West region
73
± 114.6
28.6
±
66.7
3.2
±
15.9
11.3
±
33.6
55.8
±
68.2
70.9
±
63.9
4.8
±
14.5
16.3
±
29
South-Central Coast region 54.2
±
74.1
69.1
±
81.5
12.1
±
27.7
31.8
±
56.5
Central Highlands region
73.4
± 105.5
42.3
±
56.9
5.5
±
19
21.2
±
49.7
Southeast region
96.9
±
79.1
55.9
±
59
13.2
±
23.7
46.5
±
46.9
Mekong River Delta region 67.1
±
84.9
67.8
±
73.8
11.5
±
26.6
21.3
±
36.3
Nationwide
±
89
59.8
±
72.4
9.5
±
23.8
29.5
±
44.6
Ecological regions
North-Central region
196
83.2
±
MEAN ±
SD
MEAN ±
SD
Eggs/milk
MEAN ±
SD
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F25. FOOD CONSUMPTIONIN IN 1985-1990-2000-2009
(G/CAPITA/DAY)
Food groups
1. Rice
1985
1990
2000
2010
(n = 773)
(n = 12641)
(n = 7658)
(n = 8267)
MEAN±SD
MEAN±SD
MEAN±SD
MEAN±SD
457
451.6 ± 4.0
397.3 ± 118.3
373.2 ± 138.5
2. Wheat flour
16.5 ± 33.3
3.6
6.2 ± 10.8
16.0 ± 52.6
16.9 ± 32
4. Tubers
68.2
37.6 ± 37.3
8.9 ± 44.7
4.1 ± 20.3
5. Beans/ peas
0.6
2.8 ± 5.8
6.0 ± 28.9
0.6 ± 4.2
6. Tofu
1.8
6.8 ± 7.4
13.4 ± 43.8
18.9 ± 49.1
7. Nuts / Sesame
3.3
3.8 ± 5.2
4.3 ± 15.8
2.3 ± 10
8. Vegetables (leaves)
214
124.8 ± 35.5
147.0 ± 113.9
157.3 ± 105.1
46.5 ± 27.5
32.6 ± 67.6
32.7 ± 60.7
9. Vegetables (tubers)
10. Fruits
5.4
4.1 ± 7.5
62.4 ± 118.8
60 ± 103.6
11. Sugar
0.9
0.8 ± 1.8
7.8 ± 19.1
3.8 ± 8
12. Sauces
21
24.7 ± 10.7
16.2 ± 24.9
13.6 ± 12.5
13. Fat/oil
1.7
3.0 ± 2.7
6.8 ± 8.5
8 ± 9.3
14. Meats
13.6
24.4 ± 14.4
51.0 ± 69.2
84 ± 89.9
15. Eggs/ milk
1.7
2.9 ± 3.7
10.3 ± 28.6
29.5 ± 44.6
16. Fishes
40.1
42.1 ± 16.6
45.5 ± 56.2
59.8 ± 72.3
7.9 ± 8.0
7.1 ± 21.8
9.6 ± 23.9
17. Other aqua foods
197
APPENDIX F
3. Other foods
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table F26. NUTRITIVE VALUE OF THE DIETARY INTAKE IN
1985 – 1990 – 2000 - 2009
1985
1990
2000
2010
(n = 773)
(n = 12641)
(n = 7658)
(n = 8224)
MEAN
MEAN±SD
MEAN±SD
MEAN±SD
1925
1928 ± 199.0
1931 ± 446.4
1925.4 ± 587.07
52.4
57.59 ± 7.31
61.95 ± 18.58
74.31 ± 26.46
Animal Protein (g)
10
15.39 ± 4.67
20.76 ± 15.62
30.65 ± 21.09
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
18
26.72
33.51
38.48
Total (g)
12.8
17.48 ± 5.37
24.91 ± 16.98
37.69 ± 23.42
Vegetable Fat (g)
7.4
7.23 ± 2.60
9.77 ± 9.43
14.51 ± 12.32
42.19
58.64
60.78
56.8
Nutrient
Energy (Kcal)
Protein
Total Protein (g)
Fat
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
APPENDIX F
Minerals
Calcium (mg)
541
488.30 ± 153.90 524.53 ± 587.34 506.22 ± 301.29
Calcium/ Phosphorus ratio
0.71
0.66
0.67
0.57
Iron (mg)
12.1
9.53 ± 1.17
11.16 ± 4.26
12.33 ± 4.74
0.02
0.03 ± 0.06
0.09 ± 0.28
0.15 ± 0.23
2
2.31 ± 0.93
3.11 ± 3.15
5.9 ± 5.26
A_RA (μg)
0.82
0.69 ± 0.11
0.92 ± 0.45
1.09 ± 0.57
B1 (mg)
0.45
0.36 ± 0.07
0.53 ± 0.30
0.72 ± 0.38
B2 (mg)
11
10.01 ± 1.42
11.56 ± 4.56
14.33 ± 6.9
B3 (mg)
40
53.21 ± 17.99
72.51 ± 76.99
85.12 ± 75.42
C (mg)
0.42
0.39
0.48
0.57
11.2
12.3
13.2
15.4 ± 3.7
Protein
6.2
8.4
12
17.6 ± 8.7
Fat
82.6
79.3
74.8
67 ± 10.2
Vitamins
A (μg)
Caroten (μg)
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
% Energy from:
198
199
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
9.2
9.3
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
10.4
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
4.5
8.4
3.9
8.1
5.4
6.9
7.3
5.5
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
8.3
5.7
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
Ecological regions
Red River Delta
North-East
North-West
North-Central region
South-Central Coast region
Central Highlands region
Southeast region
Mekong River Delta region
Region
Urban
Rural
Not poor
Poor
Type of commune
5.9
9.3
10.6
6.4
10.5
11.3
11.2
9.8
10.9
13.6
15.6
6.9
10
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
APPENDIX F
Nationwide
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
15.9
17.8
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
15.5
18
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
14.4
17.4
13.4
19.6
16.1
14
16
16.3
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
16.1
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
17.3
18
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
17.3
17.5
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
15.5
15.2
16.4
21.6
15.4
19.9
17.3
20.7
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
17.4
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
50.4
43.6
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
51.1
45
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
55.3
50.3
52.5
39.8
44.8
55.2
48.3
49.4
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
49.5
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
Table F27. HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION BY AVERAGE ENERGY INTAKE PER CONSUMER UNIT (8 ZONES)
7111
1059
Number
of HH
6071
2100
Number
of HH
1603
1547
332
660
1041
239
1116
1633
Number
of HH
8170
Number
of HH
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
200
10.6
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
9.3
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
10.4
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
11.3
6.4
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
6.6
4.7
7.1
6.4
7.5
5.5
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
8.3
5.7
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
9.3
5.9
Ecological regions
Red River Delta
Northern midlands and mountain areas
North Central area and Central
coastal area
Central Highlands
Southeast
Mekong River Delta
Region
Urban
Rural
Poor
Not poor
Type of commune
10.5
11.2
8.6
11.2
15.1
8.9
9.5
1500÷< 1800 Kcal
(%)
Nationwide
< 1500 Kcal
(%)
15.9
17.8
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
15.5
18
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
14.4
17.9
11.9
17.7
14.5
16.8
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
16.1
1800÷<2100 Kcal
(%)
17.3
18
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
17.3
17.5
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
15.5
14.3
17.2
17.9
19.1
19.5
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
17.4
2100÷<2400 Kcal
(%)
50.4
43.6
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
51.1
45
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
55.3
51.7
53.3
42.2
52.9
47.6
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
49.5
≥2400 Kcal
(%)
Table F28. HOUSEHOLD DISTRIBUTION BY AVERAGE ENERGY INTAKE PER CONSUMER UNIT (6 ZONES)
APPENDIX F
7111
1059
Number
of HH
6071
2100
Number
of HH
1603
1274
441
1866
1061
1926
Number
of HH
8170
Number
of HH
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
201
Rice
Wheat flour
Other foods
Tubers
Beans/peas
Tofu
Nuts / Sesame
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Food groups
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
0.5 [0.1;0.8]
12.5 [8.8;16.1]
9.9 [2.5;17.2]
0.6 [0.3;0.8]
10.5 [4.2;16.8]
9.2 [6.5;11.8]
1.7 [0.7;2.7]
1.1 [-1;3.2]
2.2 [0.8;3.5]
2.3 [1.5;3.1]
6.1 [2.4;9.7]
199.1 [184;214.1]
Mean
n = 288
7.5 [5.6;9.4]
204.7 [196.2;213.3]
Mean
n = 1673
Red River Delta
[95% CI]
1.6 [0.3;3]
7.3 [4.7;10]
14.9 [4.7;25.1]
0.5 [0;1]
12.3 [0.5;24.2]
9.0 [5.7;12.3]
219.4 [198.6;240.2]
Mean
n = 345
[95% CI]
0.7 [0.2;1.3]
4.9 [1.6;8.2]
20.3 [11.6;28.9]
3.5 [1.5;5.5]
0.2 [0;0.5]
4.7 [2.5;6.9]
236.6 [209.2;264.1]
Mean
n = 384
Northern midlands
North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
APPENDIX G
Total
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 170
Southeast
0.2 [0;0.4]
4.5 [1.8;7.2]
0.1 [-0.1;0.3]
1.0 [0.2;1.8]
1.4 [-0.3;3]
3.1 [0.8;5.4]
0.1 [-0.1;0.3]
23.8 [-10.5;58.1]
2.8 [-0.5;6]
0.3 [0;0.7]
0.3 [-0.1;0.7]
5.8 [1.6;9.9]
207.2 [186.4;228] 188.0 [168.4;207.5]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
Ecological regions
Table G1. FOOD CONSUMPTION OF CHILDREN 24-60 MONTHS BY ECOLOGICAL ZONES
APPENDIX G
[95% CI]
0.6 [-0.3;1.5]
2.0 [0.5;3.5]
4.6 [0.7;8.4]
4.7 [1.8;7.6]
2.3 [1.2;3.3]
13.1 [7.2;18.9]
192.5 [178.9;206.1]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong River
Delta
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
202
Sugar
Sweet cakes
Sauces
Fat
Oil
Meats
Eggs
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
13.9 [11.7;16]
50.1 [46;54.3]
1.6 [1.3;1.9]
0.7 [0.4;0.9]
4.5 [3.7;5.2]
3.8 [2.9;4.7]
18.6 [14.6;22.6]
61.1 [53.8;68.4]
1.9 [1.3;2.5]
0.7 [0.4;1.1]
4.5 [3.1;5.8]
4.8 [2.5;7.2]
2.4 [0.5;4.2]
60.7 [49.4;72]
50.6 [44.8;56.4]
Fruits
10
2.4 [1.6;3.2]
3.2 [1.8;4.6]
9.0 [7.2;10.9]
Vegetables
(tubers)
9
[95% CI]
49.7 [38.8;60.5]
Mean
46.9 [41.5;52.3]
[95% CI]
n = 288
Vegetables
(leaves)
Mean
n = 1673
Red River Delta
8
Food groups
Total
[95% CI]
13.4 [10.3;16.5]
43.9 [36.5;51.2]
0.3 [0;0.6]
2.1 [1.3;2.8]
2.4 [1.7;3]
3.4 [1.5;5.2]
0.9 [0.4;1.4]
28.1 [20.9;35.3]
13.7 [9.1;18.3]
73.4 [55.3;91.6]
Mean
n = 345
[95% CI]
13.1 [8.9;17.2]
38.6 [30.5;46.7]
2.2 [1.6;2.9]
1.1 [-0.3;2.4]
5.8 [4.3;7.4]
5.8 [4.3;7.4]
1.6 [0.5;2.7]
44.5 [32.1;56.8]
8.7 [6.1;11.2]
49.8 [37.6;62.1]
Mean
n = 384
[95% CI]
9.0 [4.3;13.7]
44.7 [34.3;55]
3.9 [2.3;5.4]
0.4 [0;0.9]
7.1 [3.9;10.4]
1.5 [0.7;2.3]
2.0 [0.6;3.4]
26.5 [14.6;38.3]
11.5 [5.4;17.6]
62.9 [50.4;75.4]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
Ecological regions
Northern midlands
North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
APPENDIX G
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
14.9 [8.7;21.2]
58.3 [44.2;72.4]
1.4 [0.7;2.2]
0.1 [0;0.1]
3.2 [0.9;5.4]
10.5 [5.4;15.6]
46.0 [38.5;53.5]
1.0 [0.5;1.5]
0.2 [0.1;0.3]
4.7 [3;6.4]
6.1 [3.9;8.4]
2.9 [2.1;3.7]
2.3 [-0.8;5.4]
2.9 [0.9;4.9]
39.2 [30.2;48.2]
12.3 [8.8;15.8]
31.4 [23;39.8]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong River
Delta
77.1 [60;94.2]
8.8 [1.7;15.9]
41.3 [26.3;56.3]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
203
8.0 [5.9;10]
22.5 [17.8;27.2]
Fishes (Fatty)
Fish (Lean and
others)
Other Aqua foods
Alcohol/ beer
Spices
Can
Processed food
Soft drink
Fruit juce
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
0.0 [0;0]
7.5 [1.3;13.7]
0.0 [0;0.1]
1.2 [0.5;1.9]
1.3 [1;1.5]
0.0 [0;0]
10.0 [8;11.9]
135.6 [117.1;154.1]
Fresh milk
19
12.6 [10.1;15.1]
[95% CI]
Milk
powder/cheese
Mean
n = 1673
18
Food groups
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
0.0 [0;0]
2.1 [-0.2;4.5]
0.0 [0;0]
0.0 [0;0]
1.6 [0.3;3]
0.0 [0;0]
0.1 [-0.1;0.4]
1.5 [0.9;2.2]
0.7 [0.3;1]
2.2 [0.8;3.5]
0.0 [0;0]
1.7 [0.9;2.5]
6.4 [3.1;9.7]
5.8 [3.5;8.1]
52.2 [35.8;68.6]
1.8 [0.6;3]
Mean
n = 345
[95% CI]
0.0 [0;0]
4.3 [1.2;7.3]
0.0 [0;0]
0.1 [-0.1;0.4]
1.5 [1;2]
0.0 [0;0]
9.0 [5.9;12.2]
30.9 [25.2;36.6]
5.6 [1.9;9.2]
137.2 [117.6;156.8]
5.1 [3.1;7.1]
Mean
n = 384
Northern midlands
North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
0.0 [0;0]
8.3 [5.4;11.3]
5.4 [2.5;8.2]
9.4 [5.9;12.8]
138.3 [118.5;158]
8.7 [3.7;13.6]
Mean
n = 288
Red River Delta
APPENDIX G
Total
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
25.1 [15;35.3]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
0.0 [0;0]
5.0 [-1.7;11.8]
0.0 [0;0]
0.0 [0;0]
3.7 [2.2;5.3]
0.0 [0;0]
5.5 [1.5;9.6]
22.1 [12.4;31.8]
5.2 [2;8.5]
0.0 [0;0]
18.1 [-11.8;48]
0.0 [0;0]
1.0 [-0.6;2.7]
0.9 [0.5;1.3]
0.0 [0;0]
16.2 [8.5;23.9]
23.0 [3.1;43]
11.5 [5;18]
114.8 [81.4;148.2] 228.8 [153.5;304.1]
5.9 [0.5;11.4]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
Ecological regions
[95% CI]
0.0 [0;0]
9.1 [3.4;14.8]
0.2 [-0.1;0.5]
2.0 [-0.3;4.2]
1.2 [0.5;1.9]
0.0 [0;0]
11.5 [7.7;15.4]
38.5 [30.8;46.1]
7.2 [2.4;11.9]
93.2 [73.4;113]
18.0 [13.3;22.7]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong River
Delta
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
204
[95% CI]
16.3 [15.1;17.6]
+ Animal Protein (g)
+ Animal Fat
+ Total Fat
7.0 [6.28;7.69]
27.0 [25.6;28.5]
47.0 [44.9;49]
Fat (g)
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 288
Red River Delta
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 345
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 384
Northern midlands North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 136
Central
Highlands
7.1 [5.99;8.29]
27.9 [25.3;30.5]
14.9 [13.5;16.4]
44.8 [41.3;48.3]
7.4 [6.31;8.47]
22.1 [19.8;24.4]
10.6 [9;12.2]
38.2 [35.7;40.6]
7.1 [6.3;7.91]
24.0 [21.7;26.3]
16.5 [14.5;18.5]
46.8 [43.2;50.5]
8.1 [6.12;10.12]
23.9 [20.5;27.4]
14.0 [10.4;17.6]
39.6 [34.2;45.1]
1142.8 [1107;1179] 1118.2 [1046;1191] 1117.6 [1052;1183] 1189.0 [1094;1284] 1039.2 [960;1119]
Mean
n = 1673
+ Total Protein (g)
Protein (g)
Energy (Kcal)
Food groups
Total
Ecological regions
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
n = 350
Mekong River
Delta
6.3 [3.5;9.15]
35.2 [30.3;40.1]
19.0 [13.5;24.5]
56.2 [48.7;63.7]
6.8 [5.66;8]
24.5 [22.3;26.6]
18.4 [16.6;20.1]
46.9 [44.2;49.6]
1223.6 [1118;1329] 1098.7 [1043;1154]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
Table G2: NUTRITIVE VALUE INTAKE OF CHILDREN 24-60 MONTHS BY ECOLOGICAL ZONES
APPENDIX G
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
205
683.3 [652;715]
6.5 [6.18;6.81]
5.9 [5.64;6.11]
P (mg)
Fe (mg)
Zn (mg)
Vitamin B1 (mg)
b Caroten (mg)
[95% CI]
246.4 [205;288]
5.8 [5.29;6.25]
6.5 [5.73;7.34]
635.1 [570;700]
459.8 [378;541]
173.2 [162;185]
Mean
n = 288
[95% CI]
135.1 [107;164]
5.6 [5.24;6.01]
6.2 [5.7;6.68]
498.8 [466;531]
246.6 [222;272]
192.1 [178;206]
Mean
n = 345
[95% CI]
170.6 [142;199]
5.9 [5.44;6.44]
6.6 [6.15;7.1]
655.1 [607;704]
450.5 [397;504]
196.8 [178;215]
Mean
n = 384
Northern midlands North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
[95% CI]
141.3 [98;185]
5.3 [4.73;5.81]
5.6 [4.99;6.21]
560.5 [470;651]
387.1 [287;487]
166.5 [153;180]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
[95% CI]
447.6 [317;579]
6.7 [5.93;7.48]
7.0 [6.01;8.03]
873.3 [770;976]
727.4 [622;833]
170.8 [159;183]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
0.7 [0.66;0.72]
0.7 [0.66;0.76]
0.6 [0.57;0.67]
0.7 [0.58;0.73]
0.6 [0.53;0.69]
0.8 [0.66;0.89]
1656.1 [1442;1870] 2115.6 [1676;2555] 2816.4 [1808;3825] 1482.9 [1141;1825] 2455.3 [1983;2928] 1549.0 [904;2194]
252.4 [219;286]
501.1 [465;537]
Ca (mg)
Vitamin A (mg)
179.2 [173;185]
[95% CI]
Carbohydrate (g)
Mean
n = 1673
Red River Delta
APPENDIX G
Food groups
Total
Ecological regions
[95% CI]
0.7 [0.61;0.72]
743.2 [564;923]
234.6 [174;295]
5.5 [5.12;5.82]
6.3 [5.8;6.74]
699.4 [639;759]
525.2 [441;610]
175.8 [166;186]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong Delta
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
206
347.4 [296;399]
2.7 [2.49;2.86]
37.4 [33.7;41]
89.8 [75;104.6]
348.0 [316;380]
2.7 [2.62;2.82]
1.2 [1.11;1.25]
1.5 [1.16;1.76]
Vitamin C (mg)
Bio Beta
Caroten (mcg)
Bio vitamin A
Bio Zinc (mcg)
Bio Iron (mg)
Phytat-zinc ratio
1.7 [1.38;2.03]
1.2 [1.08;1.36]
99.9 [79.6;120.3]
44.5 [36.3;52.8]
6.8 [6.19;7.41]
7.6 [7.1;8.01]
[95% CI]
0.7 [0.61;0.81]
Mean
vitamin B3 (mg)
[95% CI]
n = 288
0.8 [0.71;0.81]
Mean
n = 1673
Red River Delta
Vitamin B2 (mg)
Food groups
Total
[95% CI]
2.1 [1.45;2.84]
1.0 [0.85;1.07]
2.6 [2.46;2.75]
263.2 [212;314]
127.9 [82.5;173.3]
38.4 [29.6;47.2]
6.9 [6.41;7.49]
0.4 [0.39;0.48]
Mean
n = 345
[95% CI]
1.6 [0.87;2.4]
1.2 [1.02;1.33]
2.8 [2.51;3.06]
256.7 [222;292]
84.1 [64;104.1]
38.9 [29.1;48.8]
8.5 [7.79;9.13]
0.7 [0.61;0.72]
Mean
n = 384
[95% CI]
0.6 [0.4;0.81]
1.1 [0.81;1.29]
2.6 [2.31;2.81]
265.1 [210;320]
123.4 [94.1;152.8]
43.0 [32.3;53.7]
6.8 [5.98;7.67]
0.6 [0.49;0.72]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
Ecological regions
Northern midlands North Central
and mountain
area and Central
areas
coastal area
APPENDIX G
[95% CI]
1.5 [0.41;2.52]
1.4 [1.17;1.65]
3.0 [2.7;3.27]
569.7 [443;696]
107.3 [44.4;170.2]
40.9 [31.2;50.7]
8.1 [6.9;9.34]
1.2 [1;1.35]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
[95% CI]
1.0 [0.56;1.49]
1.1 [0.97;1.19]
2.6 [2.42;2.73]
288.4 [225;351]
44.7 [31.2;58.2]
24.5 [20.8;28.2]
7.5 [6.12;8.92]
0.7 [0.63;0.79]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong River
Delta
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
207
63% [62%;64%]
33% [31%;34%]
30% [28%;32%]
68% [66%;71%]
Carbohydrate
Animal Protein/
Total Protein (%)
Animal Fat / Total
Fat (%)
Ca/ P (%)
[95% CI]
68% [63%;73%]
27% [24%;31%]
31% [29%;33%]
62% [60%;63%]
22% [21%;24%]
16% [16%;16%]
1118 [1046;1191]
Mean
n = 288
[95% CI]
48% [46%;51%]
39% [34%;44%]
26% [23%;29%]
68% [66%;70%]
18% [17%;20%]
14% [13%;14%]
1118 [1052;1183]
Mean
n = 345
Northern midlands
and mountain
areas
[95% CI]
67% [61%;74%]
35% [32%;39%]
33% [31%;35%]
66% [64%;67%]
18% [17%;20%]
16% [16%;16%]
1189 [1094;1284]
Mean
n = 384
North Central
area and Central
coastal area
106% [103%;109%] 117% [111%;122%] 126% [121%;131%] 102% [95%;109%]
21% [20%;22%]
Fat
Vitamin B1/
1000 Kcal (mg)
16% [16%;17%]
1143 [1107;1179]
[95% CI]
Protein
% Energy from:
Energy (Kcal)
Mean
n = 1673
Red River Delta
APPENDIX G
Nutrition Index
Total
[95% CI]
117% [106%;127%]
67% [59%;75%]
44% [38%;51%]
33% [28%;38%]
65% [62%;67%]
20% [18%;23%]
15% [14%;17%]
1039 [960;1119]
Mean
n = 136
Central
Highlands
Ecological regions
[95% CI]
92% [85%;99%]
80% [73%;86%]
19% [14%;24%]
31% [25%;36%]
57% [54%;60%]
25% [23%;27%]
18% [17%;19%]
1224 [1118;1329]
Mean
n = 170
Southeast
Table G3. BALANCE INTAKE OF CHILDREN 24-60 MONTHS BY ECOLOGICAL ZONES
[95% CI]
100% [93%;107%]
69% [64%;74%]
30% [27%;33%]
38% [35%;41%]
63% [62%;65%]
20% [18%;21%]
17% [16%;18%]
1099 [1043;1154]
Mean
n = 350
Mekong Delta
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G4. RECOMMENDATE DIETARY ALLOWANCE CHILDREN 24-60 MONTHS
BY ECOLOGICAL ZONES
Protein (%)
Vitamin A (%)
Vitamin B1(%)
Vitamin B2 (%)
vitamin B3 (%)
APPENDIX G
Vitamin C (%)
Phosphorus (%)
Calcium (%)
Iron (%)
Zinc (%)
Iodine (%)
Vitamin ABio (%)
Ironio (%)
ZincBio (%)
Vitamin CProc (%)
208
Mekong
River
Delta
Total
Red River
Delta
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
Mean
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
Nutrient
Energy (%)
Northern
North
midlands
Central
Central
and
area and
Southeast
Highlands
mountain
Central
areas
coastal area
96%
92%
92%
97%
86%
106%
93%
[93%; 98%]
[87%; 98%]
[86%; 97%]
[89%; 105%]
[79%; 93%]
[98%; 113%]
[88%; 98%]
115%
108%
93%
113%
97%
139%
117%
[110%; 120%] [101%; 116%]
[86%; 99%] [105%; 121%]
[84%; 110%] [122%; 157%] [110%; 124%]
65%
61%
34%
42%
36%
121%
61%
[56%; 75%]
[51%; 71%]
[27%; 41%]
[35%; 49%]
[25%; 47%]
[80%; 162%]
[46%; 77%]
137%
140%
122%
129%
121%
158%
134%
[131%; 144%] [130%; 150%] [112%; 131%] [115%; 143%] [103%; 140%] [135%; 181%] [123%; 146%]
153%
141%
[143%; 163%] [121%; 160%]
123%
109%
86%
130%
[76%; 95%] [119%; 141%]
111%
134%
[115%; 130%] [100%; 118%] [102%; 120%] [123%; 145%]
129%
152%
129%
[117%; 142%] [125%; 179%] [100%; 159%]
152%
139%
109%
133%
120%
242%
144%
[97%; 142%] [209%; 275%] [127%; 161%]
136%
124%
[95%; 122%] [118%; 153%]
109%
[98%; 150%]
144%
87%
[99%; 167%] [110%; 183%] [110%; 178%]
[74%; 101%]
143%
147%
123%
197%
158%
[145%; 159%] [125%; 152%] [101%; 116%] [132%; 153%] [103%; 143%] [176%; 219%] [144%; 172%]
101%
91%
49%
88%
[93%; 108%]
[75%; 106%]
[44%; 54%]
[78%; 98%]
150%
107%
[57%; 95%] [129%; 170%]
76%
[89%; 125%]
70%
70%
64%
71%
61%
75%
70%
[66%; 74%]
[61%; 79%]
[58%; 70%]
[66%; 76%]
[54%; 68%]
[62%; 87%]
[64%; 76%]
69%
67%
65%
69%
62%
81%
65%
[67%; 72%]
[62%; 72%]
[61%; 70%]
[63%; 74%]
[55%; 68%]
[73%; 90%]
[61%; 69%]
35%
35%
27%
39%
32%
44%
29%
[33%; 37%]
[32%; 38%]
[24%; 30%]
[34%; 44%]
[28%; 37%]
[35%; 52%]
[27%; 32%]
46%
52%
64%
43%
61%
57%
23%
[39%; 54%]
[41%; 62%]
[42%; 85%]
[33%; 53%]
[45%; 77%]
[24%; 90%]
[16%; 30%]
70%
70%
64%
71%
61%
75%
70%
[66%; 74%]
[61%; 79%]
[58%; 70%]
[66%; 76%]
[54%; 68%]
[62%; 87%]
[64%; 76%]
32%
31%
30%
32%
30%
36%
31%
[31%; 33%]
[29%; 33%]
[28%; 32%]
[29%; 35%]
[27%; 33%]
[33%; 39%]
[29%; 32%]
65%
76%
65%
67%
73%
72%
44%
[58%; 71%]
[62%; 90%]
[50%; 79%]
[49%; 84%]
[55%; 91%]
[55%; 89%]
[37%; 50%]
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G5. FOOD CONSUMPTION OF CHILDREN 24-60 MONTHS BY AGE GROUPS
(GRAM/ CHILD/ DAY)
Age groups
Total
No.
Food groups
24-35 month
36-59 month
n = 610
n = 1063
n = 1673
Mean
[95% CI]
204.7 [196.2; 213.3]
Mean
[95% CI]
[95% CI]
1
Rice
2
Wheat flour
7.5 [5.6; 9.4]
6.1 [3.7; 8.6]
8.2 [6.1; 10.3]
3
Other foods
2.2 [0.8; 3.5]
3.1 [0.9; 5.3]
1.7 [0.7; 2.8]
4
Tubers
2.3 [1.5; 3.1]
2.6 [1.1; 4]
2.1 [1.1; 3.2]
5
Beans/peas
9.2 [6.5; 11.8]
9.3 [5; 13.7]
9.1 [5.9; 12.2]
6
Tofu
9.9 [2.5; 17.2]
6.1 [2.9; 9.4]
11.9 [0.8; 23]
7
Nuts / Sesame
0.6 [0.3; 0.8]
0.7 [0.1; 1.4]
0.5 [0.2; 0.7]
8
Vegetables (leaves)
46.9 [41.5; 52.3]
41.7 [35.5; 47.8]
49.8 [42.5; 57]
9
Vegetables (tubers)
10
Fruits
50.6 [44.8; 56.4]
47.9 [38.2; 57.6]
11
Sugar
2.4 [1.6; 3.2]
1.8 [1.2; 2.4]
2.7 [1.6; 3.9]
12
Sweet cakes
3.8 [2.9; 4.7]
4.3 [3; 5.6]
3.5 [2.4; 4.7]
13
Sauces
4.5 [3.7; 5.2]
4 [3; 5]
4.7 [3.7; 5.7]
14
Fat
0.7 [0.4; 0.9]
0.5 [0.3; 0.7]
0.7 [0.3; 1.1]
15
Oil
1.6 [1.3; 1.9]
52.7 [45.5; 59.9]
48.8 [43.7; 53.9]
16
Meats
50.1 [46; 54.3]
52.7 [45.5; 59.9]
48.8 [43.7; 53.9]
17
Eggs
13.9 [11.7; 16]
13 [9.6; 16.3]
14.3 [11.7; 16.9]
18
Milk powder/cheese
12.6 [10.1; 15.1]
17.7 [13.6; 21.8]
9.9 [7.2; 12.7]
19
Fresh milk
135.6 [117.1; 154.1]
129.6 [111.6; 147.6]
138.8 [112.7; 164.9]
20
Fishes (Fatty)
21
Fish (Lean and others)
22
Other Aqua foods
23
Alcohol/ beer
24
9 [7.2; 10.9]
183.3 [173.5; 193.1]
Mean
8.8 [6.5; 11.1]
216.2 [203.9; 228.5]
9.1 [6.8; 11.5]
52 [45.3; 58.7]
6.2 [3; 9.4]
8.9 [6.5; 11.3]
22.5 [17.8; 27.2]
17.6 [14; 21.1]
25.1 [18.6; 31.6]
10 [8; 11.9]
10.7 [6.7; 14.7]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
Spices
1.3 [1; 1.5]
1.3 [1; 1.6]
25
Can
1.2 [0.5; 1.9]
1.5 [0.3; 2.8]
26
Processed food
27
Soft drink
28
Fruit juce
0 [0; 0.1]
7.5 [1.3; 13.7]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
2.5 [-0.2; 5.2]
0 [0; 0]
APPENDIX G
8 [5.9; 10]
9.6 [7.1; 12]
0 [0; 0]
1.2 [0.9; 1.5]
1 [0.4; 1.6]
0.1 [0; 0.2]
10.1 [0.7; 19.5]
0 [0; 0]
209
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G6. NUTRITIVE VALUE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS
BY AGE GROUPS (PER CHILD PER DAY)
Total
Nutrient
Age groups
24-35 month
36-59 month
n = 610
n = 1063
n = 1673
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
1143 [1107; 1179]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1078 [1041; 1115]
1177 [1130; 1225]
Protein (g)
+ Total Protein (g)
47.0 [44.9; 49]
45.5 [43.2; 47.8]
47.8 [44.9; 50.6]
+ Animal Protein (g)
16.3 [15.1; 17.6]
16.2 [14.6; 17.8]
16.4 [14.7; 18.1]
+ Total Fat
27.0 [25.6; 28.5]
27.3 [25.1; 29.5]
26.9 [24.9; 28.8]
+ Animal Fat
6.98 [6.28; 7.69]
6.47 [5.71; 7.24]
7.26 [6.36; 8.15]
Carbohydrate (g)
179 [173; 185]
165 [158; 171]
187 [179; 195]
Ca (mg)
501 [465; 537]
522 [467; 578]
490 [443; 537]
P (mg)
683 [652; 715]
684 [640; 729]
683 [641; 724]
Fe (mg)
6.49 [6.18; 6.81]
6.07 [5.66; 6.48]
6.72 [6.28; 7.16]
Zn (mg)
5.87 [5.64; 6.11]
5.71 [5.42; 6]
5.96 [5.65; 6.27]
Vitamin A (mg)
252 [219; 286]
278 [213; 343]
239 [204; 274]
b Caroten (mg)
1656 [1442; 1870]
1434 [1226; 1641]
1774 [1486; 2062]
Vitamin B1 (mg)
0.69 [0.66; 0.72]
0.69 [0.63; 0.75]
0.68 [0.65; 0.72]
Vitamin B2 (mg)
0.76 [0.71; 0.81]
0.80 [0.72; 0.88]
0.74 [0.67; 0.81]
vitamin B3 (mg)
7.56 [7.1; 8.01]
7.56 [6.57; 8.55]
7.55 [7.11; 8]
Vitamin C (mg)
37.4 [33.7; 41]
33.2 [28.1; 38.3]
39.6 [34.8; 44.4]
Bio. Beta Caroten (mcg)
89.8 [75; 104.6]
87.5 [61.5; 113.5]
91.1 [76.6; 105.6]
Bio. vitamin A
348 [316; 380]
369 [301; 437]
337 [302; 372]
Bio. Zinc (mcg)
2.72 [2.62; 2.82]
2.62 [2.5; 2.74]
2.77 [2.64; 2.9]
Bio. Iron (mg)
1.18 [1.11; 1.25]
1.16 [1.03; 1.29]
1.19 [1.1; 1.28]
Phytat-zinc ratio
1.46 [1.16; 1.76]
1.40 [0.91; 1.89]
1.49 [1.12; 1.87]
APPENDIX G
Fat (g)
210
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G7. BALANCE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS
BY AGE GROUPS
Age groups
Total
Nutrition Index
24-35 month
36-59 month
n = 610
n = 1063
n = 1673
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1143 [1107; 1179]
1078 [1041; 1115]
1177 [1130; 1225]
Protein
16% [16%; 17%]
17% [16%; 17%]
16% [16%; 17%]
Fat
21% [20%; 22%]
22% [21%; 24%]
20% [19%; 21%]
Carbohydrate
63% [62%; 64%]
61% [59%; 63%]
63% [62%; 65%]
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
33% [31%; 34%]
33% [31%; 35%]
32% [30%; 34%]
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
30% [28%; 32%]
29% [26%; 32%]
31% [29%; 33%]
Ca/ P (%)
68% [66%; 71%]
71% [67%; 76%]
67% [64%; 70%]
106% [103%; 109%]
108% [101%; 114%]
105% [102%; 109%]
% Energy from:
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
Table G8. RECOMMENDATE DIETARY ALLOWANCE CHILDREN
FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY AGE GROUPS
Age groups
Total
n = 1673
%
[95% CI]
%
24-35 month
36-59 month
n = 610
n = 1063
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
Energy (%)
96% [93%; 98%]
95% [91%; 98%]
96% [92%; 100%]
Protein (%)
115% [110%; 120%]
119% [113%; 125%]
113% [106%; 120%]
Vitamin A (%)
65% [56%; 75%]
72% [55%; 90%]
62% [51%; 72%]
Vitamin B1(%)
137% [131%; 144%]
144% [131%; 157%]
133% [126%; 141%]
Vitamin B2 (%)
153% [143%; 163%]
166% [150%; 183%]
146% [132%; 160%]
vitamin B3 (%)
123% [115%; 130%]
131% [113%; 149%]
118% [112%; 125%]
Vitamin C (%)
129% [117%; 142%]
115% [97%; 132%]
137% [120%; 153%]
Phosphorus (%)
152% [145%; 159%]
155% [144%; 165%]
150% [141%; 159%]
Calcium (%)
101% [93%; 108%]
109% [97%; 120%]
96% [87%; 106%]
Iron (%)
70% [66%; 74%]
57% [53%; 61%]
77% [72%; 82%]
Zinc (%)
69% [67%; 72%]
70% [67%; 74%]
69% [65%; 72%]
Iodine (%)
35% [33%; 37%]
32% [29%; 34%]
37% [34%; 40%]
Vitamin ABio (%)
46% [39%; 54%]
46% [33%; 60%]
46% [39%; 53%]
IronBio (%)
70% [66%; 74%]
57% [53%; 61%]
77% [72%; 82%]
Bio
32% [31%; 33%]
32% [31%; 34%]
32% [30%; 33%]
65% [58%; 71%]
57% [49%; 66%]
68% [60%; 77%]
Zinc
(%)
Vitamin C
Proc
(%)
* Bio = Bioavailable; Proc = After Processing
211
APPENDIX G
Nutrient
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G9. FOOD CONSUMPTION OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY CHILD
WHO ARE STUNTED (GRAM/ CHILD/ DAY)
Stunting
Total
No.
n = 1636
Mean
APPENDIX G
No
Yes
n = 1140
n = 496
Food groups
[95% CI]
206.3 [197.7; 214.8]
Mean
[95% CI]
206.2 [197.7; 214.7]
Mean
[95% CI]
1
Rice
206.5 [189.8; 223.3]
2
Wheat flour
7.5 [5.6; 9.5]
7.3 [5.3; 9.3]
8.2 [5; 11.3]
3
Other foods
2 [0.8; 3.1]
1.6 [0.4; 2.8]
3 [0.3; 5.7]
4
Tubers
2.3 [1.5; 3.2]
2.3 [1.3; 3.4]
2.3 [0.9; 3.8]
5
Beans/peas
9 [6.4; 11.6]
9.7 [6.7; 12.6]
7.2 [3.5; 10.9]
6
Tofu
10.1 [2.6; 17.6]
11.6 [1.7; 21.4]
5.8 [3.3; 8.2]
7
Nuts / Sesame
8
Vegetables (leaves)
9
Vegetables (tubers)
10
0.6 [0.3; 0.9]
0.6 [0.2; 1]
0.5 [0.2; 0.8]
47.3 [41.8; 52.8]
47.5 [41.1; 54]
46.7 [35.9; 57.4]
9.1 [7.3; 11]
9.4 [7.1; 11.6]
8.4 [5.6; 11.3]
Fruits
50.7 [44.4; 57]
56.9 [49.2; 64.5]
32.4 [22.7; 42.1]
11
Sugar
2.5 [1.6; 3.3]
2.5 [1.5; 3.5]
2.3 [1.5; 3]
12
Sweet cakes
3.9 [3; 4.8]
4.1 [3; 5.1]
3.3 [1.6; 5]
13
Sauces
4.5 [3.7; 5.3]
4.6 [3.6; 5.6]
4.1 [3.2; 4.9]
14
Fat
0.7 [0.4; 0.9]
0.4 [0.2; 0.6]
1.4 [0.4; 2.3]
15
Oil
1.6 [1.4; 1.9]
55.3 [49.9; 60.7]
34.7 [29.5; 39.8]
16
Meats
50.1 [45.9; 54.2]
55.3 [49.9; 60.7]
34.7 [29.5; 39.8]
17
Eggs
14 [11.8; 16.2]
14.2 [11.8; 16.6]
13.3 [8.2; 18.5]
18
Milk powder/cheese
19
Fresh milk
20
Fishes (Fatty)
21
Fish (Lean and others)
22
Other Aqua foods
23
Alcohol/ beer
24
Spices
1.3 [1; 1.5]
1.2 [0.9; 1.5]
1.5 [1; 1.9]
25
Can
1.2 [0.5; 1.9]
1.2 [0.6; 1.9]
1.2 [-0.9; 3.3]
26
Processed food
27
Soft drink
7.7 [1.3; 14]
28
Fruit juce
0 [0; 0]
212
12.6 [10; 15.1]
14.1 [11; 17.1]
135.9 [116.9; 154.9]
147.5 [124.4; 170.7]
8 [5.9; 10.1]
8.3 [5.7; 10.9]
22.7 [18; 27.5]
9.9 [7.8; 11.9]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0.1]
8 [4.9; 11.1]
101.3 [83.8; 118.7]
7.2 [4.5; 10]
23.1 [16.9; 29.3]
21.6 [16.8; 26.3]
10.1 [7.6; 12.5]
9.3 [5.9; 12.7]
0 [0; 0]
0.1 [0; 0.2]
8.1 [-0.4; 16.5]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
6.4 [1.7; 11.2]
0 [0; 0]
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G10. NUTRITIVE VALUE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY
CHILD WHO ARE STUNTED (PER CHILD PER DAY)
Stunting
Total
No
Yes
n = 1140
n = 496
Nutrient
n = 1636
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1148 [1113;1183]
1172 [1132;1212]
1076 [1019;1133]
+ Total Protein (g)
47.1 [45.1;49.2]
49.1 [46.6;51.6]
41.3 [38.5;44]
+ Animal Protein (g)
16.4 [15.1;17.6]
17.4 [15.7;19.1]
13.4 [11.9;14.8]
+ Total Fat
27.1 [25.7;28.6]
28.7 [26.9;30.5]
22.3 [20.5;24.2]
+ Animal Fat
7.05 [6.34;7.75]
7.08 [6.2;7.96]
6.94 [5.93;7.95]
Carbohydrate (g)
180 [174;186]
181 [175;187]
178 [167;190]
Ca (mg)
501 [464;539]
525 [484;566]
430 [361;499]
P (mg)
685 [653;717]
717 [681;754]
588 [535;640]
Fe (mg)
6.52 [6.2;6.84]
6.79 [6.37;7.21]
5.71 [5.36;6.07]
Zn (mg)
5.89 [5.66;6.13]
6.09 [5.81;6.37]
5.30 [4.97;5.63]
Vitamin A (mg)
248 [214;283]
268 [226;310]
190 [143;237]
b Caroten (mg)
1659 [1442;1877]
1707 [1437;1976]
1518 [1235;1802]
Vitamin B1(mg)
0.69 [0.66;0.72]
0.73 [0.69;0.77]
0.58 [0.53;0.62]
Vitamin B2 (mg)
0.76 [0.71;0.81]
0.82 [0.75;0.88]
0.59 [0.53;0.65]
vitamin B3 (mg)
7.57 [7.11;8.02]
7.88 [7.3;8.46]
6.64 [6.2;7.08]
Vitamin C (mg)
37.2 [33.4;41]
39.7 [35.1;44.3]
29.7 [24.1;35.2]
Bio. Beta
Caroten (mcg)
90.3 [75.1;105.4]
95.7 [76.9;114.4]
74.2 [60.2;88.2]
Bio. vitamin A
345 [311;378]
370 [329;412]
267 [220;315]
Bio. Zinc (mcg )
2.73 [2.63;2.82]
2.82 [2.7;2.93]
2.46 [2.31;2.62]
Bio. Iron (mg)
1.18 [1.11;1.25]
1.27 [1.17;1.37]
0.92 [0.84;0.99]
Phytat-zinc ratio
1.49 [1.19;1.79]
1.52 [1.13;1.92]
1.38 [1.05;1.71]
Protein (g)
Fat (g)
APPENDIX G
213
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G11. BALANCE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY
CHILD WHO ARE STUNTED
Stunting
Total
No
Yes
n = 1140
n = 496
Nutrition Index
n = 1636
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1148 [1113;1183]
1172 [1132;1212]
1076 [1019;1133]
Protein
16% [16%;17%]
17% [16%;17%]
16% [15%;16%]
Fat
21% [20%;22%]
22% [21%;23%]
19% [18%;20%]
Carbohydrate
63% [62%;64%]
62% [60%;63%]
66% [64%;67%]
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
33% [31%;34%]
33% [31%;35%]
30% [28%;33%]
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
30% [28%;32%]
28% [26%;30%]
37% [33%;40%]
Ca/ P (%)
68% [66%;71%]
68% [66%;71%]
68% [62%;73%]
106% [103%;109%]
106% [103%;110%]
105% [98%;112%]
% Energy from:
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
Table G12. RECOMMENDATE DIETARY ALLOWANCE CHILDREN
FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY CHILD WHO ARE STUNTED
Stunting
Total
APPENDIX G
Nutrient
n = 1636I
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
No
Yes
n = 1140
n = 496
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
Energy (%)
96% [93%;99%]
98% [95%;101%]
89% [84%;94%]
Protein (%)
115% [111%;120%]
120% [114%;126%]
101% [94%;108%]
Vitamin A (%)
64% [54%;74%]
70% [57%;82%]
48% [36%;60%]
Vitamin B1(%)
137% [131%;144%]
145% [137%;153%]
115% [105%;124%]
Vitamin B2 (%)
153% [142%;163%]
164% [152%;176%]
118% [105%;131%]
vitamin B3 (%)
123% [115%;131%]
128% [118%;138%]
107% [99%;114%]
Vitamin C (%)
128% [115%;141%]
137% [121%;152%]
102% [83%;122%]
Phosphorus (%)
152% [145%;159%]
159% [152%;167%]
130% [118%;141%]
Calcium (%)
101% [93%;108%]
106% [97%;114%]
85% [72%;99%]
Iron (%)
70% [67%;74%]
73% [69%;78%]
62% [57%;66%]
Zinc (%)
69% [67%;72%]
72% [69%;75%]
62% [58%;66%]
Iodine (%)
35% [33%;38%]
36% [34%;39%]
32% [29%;35%]
Vitamin ABio (%)
46% [39%;54%]
49% [40%;59%]
38% [30%;45%]
IronBio (%)
70% [67%;74%]
73% [69%;78%]
62% [57%;66%]
ZincBio (%)
32% [31%;33%]
33% [32%;34%]
29% [27%;31%]
64% [57%;71%]
68% [61%;76%]
51% [41%;61%]
Vitamin C
214
Proc
(%)
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G13. FOOD CONSUMPTION OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS
BY CHILD WHO ARE UNDERWEIGHT (GRAM/ CHILD/ DAY)
Underweight
Total
Food groups
No.
n = 1659
Mean
[95% CI]
205 [196.4; 213.6]
Mean
No
Yes
n = 1266
n = 393
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1
Rice
2
Wheat flour
7.5 [5.6; 9.5]
3
Other foods
2.2 [0.8; 3.6]
2.5 [0.9; 4]
1.1 [0.1; 2.1]
4
Tubers
2.3 [1.5; 3.1]
2.4 [1.4; 3.3]
2.1 [0.6; 3.6]
5
Beans/peas
9.1 [6.5; 11.8]
9.8 [6.7; 12.8]
6.4 [1.8; 11]
6
Tofu
10 [2.5; 17.4]
11 [1.7; 20.2]
5.9 [3.2; 8.7]
7
Nuts / Sesame
0.6 [0.3; 0.9]
0.5 [0.2; 0.9]
0.6 [0.1; 1.1]
8
Vegetables (leaves)
46.9 [41.5; 52.4]
46.2 [40.4; 51.9]
9
Vegetables (tubers)
9.1 [7.2; 10.9]
8.5 [6.8; 10.2]
10
Fruits
50.2 [44.1; 56.3]
55.7 [48.6; 62.8]
27.8 [17.4; 38.3]
11
Sugar
2.4 [1.6; 3.2]
2.4 [1.5; 3.4]
2.3 [1.5; 3.2]
12
Sweet cakes
3.8 [2.9; 4.7]
3.6 [2.7; 4.6]
4.6 [2.3; 6.9]
13
Sauces
4.5 [3.7; 5.2]
4.2 [3.4; 5]
5.5 [3.2; 7.8]
14
Fat
0.7 [0.4; 0.9]
0.5 [0.3; 0.7]
1.3 [0.2; 2.5]
15
Oil
1.6 [1.4; 1.9]
52.9 [47.8; 58]
38.6 [31.7; 45.6]
16
Meats
50.1 [45.9; 54.3]
52.9 [47.8; 58]
38.6 [31.7; 45.6]
17
Eggs
13.9 [11.7; 16]
14.1 [11.7; 16.5]
13.2 [8.8; 17.6]
18
Milk owder/ cheese
12.5 [10; 15]
13.8 [10.9; 16.8]
7.1 [3.6; 10.6]
19
Fresh milk
135.6 [116.7; 154.4]
142.3 [121.5; 163]
108.3 [86.6; 130.1]
20
Fishes (Fatty)
8 [5.9; 10.1]
7.9 [5.5; 10.3]
8.5 [3.9; 13.2]
21
Fish (Lean and others)
22
Other Aqua foods
23
Alcohol/ beer
24
Spices
1.3 [1; 1.5]
1.2 [0.9; 1.5]
1.6 [1.2; 2]
25
Can
1.2 [0.5; 1.9]
1.1 [0.5; 1.7]
1.6 [-0.8; 3.9]
26
Processed food
27
Soft drink
28
Fruit juce
206.1 [183.5; 228.8]
7 [4.9; 9.1]
9.7 [6.1; 13.3]
50 [37.6; 62.3]
11.3 [5.7; 17]
22.6 [17; 28.1]
22.6 [17.3; 27.8]
10 [8; 12]
11.4 [9; 13.8]
4.2 [2.8; 5.6]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0.1]
7.5 [1.3; 13.8]
0 [0; 0]
0.1 [0; 0.1]
8.4 [0.7; 16.2]
0 [0; 0]
APPENDIX G
22.6 [17.8; 27.3]
204.7 [196.4; 213]
0 [0; 0]
0 [0; 0]
3.9 [0.6; 7.1]
0 [0; 0]
215
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G14. NUTRITIVE VALUE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS
BY CHILD WHO ARE UNDERWEIGHT (PER CHILD PER DAY)
Underweight
Total
No
Yes
n = 1266
n = 393
Nutrient
n = 1659
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
1143 [1107;1179]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1160 [1120;1200]
1076 [1004;1147]
Protein (g)
+ Total Protein (g)
47.0 [44.9;49]
48.5 [46.1;50.9]
40.7 [38.1;43.4]
+ Animal Protein (g)
16.4 [15.1;17.6]
17.0 [15.5;18.5]
13.6 [12;15.2]
+ Total Fat
27.0 [25.6;28.5]
27.8 [26.1;29.6]
23.7 [21.5;25.9]
+ Animal Fat
7.02 [6.31;7.72]
6.96 [6.06;7.85]
7.27 [6.22;8.31]
Carbohydrate (g)
179 [173;185]
180 [174;186]
176 [161;190]
Ca (mg)
500 [463;537]
533 [490;576]
366 [324;408]
P (mg)
683 [651;715]
710 [672;748]
573 [530;615]
Fe (mg)
6.49 [6.17;6.81]
6.68 [6.29;7.08]
5.72 [5.31;6.14]
Zn (mg)
5.87 [5.64;6.11]
6.05 [5.77;6.33]
5.15 [4.78;5.51]
Vitamin A (mg)
252 [218;285]
272 [231;314]
167 [131;203]
b Caroten (mg)
1649 [1433;1865]
1688 [1422;1955]
1489 [1230;1748]
Vitamin B1 (mg)
0.69 [0.66;0.72]
0.71 [0.67;0.75]
0.59 [0.53;0.64]
Vitamin B2 (mg)
0.76 [0.7;0.81]
0.80 [0.74;0.87]
0.57 [0.51;0.64]
vitamin B3 (mg)
7.55 [7.09;8.01]
7.79 [7.24;8.34]
6.57 [6.11;7.04]
Vitamin C (mg)
36.9 [33.2;40.7]
38.8 [34.5;43]
29.4 [23.1;35.6]
Bio. Beta Caroten (mcg)
89.6 [74.6;104.6]
93.0 [74.2;111.7]
76.0 [60.9;91.1]
Bio. vitamin A
347 [314;380]
372 [330;413]
247 [208;285]
Bio. Zinc (mcg)
2.72 [2.62;2.82]
2.79 [2.69;2.9]
2.43 [2.25;2.61]
Bio. Iron (mg)
1.18 [1.11;1.25]
1.23 [1.15;1.32]
0.96 [0.87;1.05]
Phytat-zinc ratio
1.46 [1.17;1.76]
1.52 [1.15;1.89]
1.23 [0.9;1.57]
APPENDIX G
Fat (g)
216
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table G15. BALANCE INTAKE OF CHILDREN FROM 24-60 MONTHS
BY CHILD WHO ARE UNDERWEIGHT
Underweight
Total
No
Yes
n = 1266
n = 393
Nutrition Index
n = 1659
Mean
Energy (Kcal)
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
Mean
[95% CI]
1143 [1107; 1179]
1160 [1120; 1200]
1076 [1004; 1147]
Protein
16% [16%; 17%]
17% [16%; 17%]
16% [15%; 16%]
Fat
21% [20%; 22%]
21% [20%; 22%]
20% [18%; 22%]
Carbohydrate
63% [62%; 64%]
62% [61%; 63%]
64% [62%; 66%]
Animal Protein/ Total Protein (%)
33% [31%; 34%]
33% [31%; 35%]
31% [29%; 34%]
Animal Fat / Total Fat (%)
30% [28%; 32%]
28% [26%; 31%]
37% [33%; 41%]
Ca/ P (%)
68% [66%; 71%]
70% [67%; 73%]
60% [56%; 64%]
106% [103%; 109%]
106% [103%; 110%]
107% [99%; 115%]
% Energy from:
Vitamin B1/ 1000 Kcal (mg)
APPENDIX G
Table G16. RECOMMENDATE DIETARY ALLOWANCE CHILDREN
FROM 24-60 MONTHS BY CHILD WHO ARE UNDERWEIGHT
Underweight
Total
No
Yes
n = 1266
n = 393
Nutrient
n = 1659
%
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
Energy (%)
96% [93%; 98%]
97% [94%; 100%]
89% [83%; 95%]
Protein (%)
115% [110%; 120%]
119% [113%; 125%]
100% [93%; 106%]
Vitamin A (%)
65% [55%; 75%]
71% [58%; 83%]
43% [34%; 52%]
Vitamin B1(%)
137% [131%; 144%]
142% [134%; 150%]
117% [106%; 129%]
Vitamin B2 (%)
152% [142%; 163%]
161% [149%; 174%]
116% [102%; 129%]
217
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Underweight
Total
No
Yes
n = 1266
n = 393
Nutrient
n = 1659
%
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
%
[95% CI]
123% [115%; 130%]
127% [117%; 136%]
105% [97%; 112%]
Vitamin C (%)
127% [114%; 140%]
133% [119%; 148%]
102% [80%; 125%]
Phosphorus (%)
151% [144%; 158%]
157% [149%; 166%]
127% [117%; 137%]
Calcium (%)
100% [93%; 108%]
107% [98%; 115%]
73% [64%; 82%]
Iron (%)
70% [66%; 74%]
72% [67%; 76%]
63% [58%; 69%]
Zinc (%)
69% [67%; 72%]
71% [68%; 75%]
60% [56%; 65%]
Iodine (%)
35% [33%; 37%]
36% [33%; 38%]
33% [30%; 36%]
Vitamin ABio (%)
46% [38%; 54%]
48% [38%; 58%]
39% [31%; 47%]
IronBio (%)
70% [66%; 74%]
72% [67%; 76%]
63% [58%; 69%]
ZincBio (%)
32% [31%; 33%]
33% [32%; 34%]
28% [26%; 31%]
Vitamin CProc (%)
64% [57%; 70%]
67% [59%; 74%]
51% [40%; 63%]
APPENDIX G
vitamin B3(%)
* Bio = Bioavailable; Proc = After Processing
218
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX H: KAP REPORT ON HOUSEHOLD FOOD SAFETY
Table H1. PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN/HEARD/LEARNT
ABOUT FOOD SAFETY
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Have ever
seen/heard/learnt
87.8
75.1
87.4
85.6
87.3
75.6
82.1
Never
5.3
12.6
6.8
7.0
10.8
14.4
9.7
Don’t know,
no answer
6.9
12.3
5.8
7.4
1.9
10.0
8.2
Table H2. SOURCES OF INFORMATION ON FOOD HYGIENE AND SAFETY
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
Option
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Red
River
Delta
Total
Loud speaker, radio
17.4
7.0
13.8
2.3
10.5
11.7
11.3
Television
62.1
52.3
59.8
73.0
65.1
56.4
59.1
Book, newspaper,
leaflets
1.5
0.8
0.6
0.8
1.8
1.3
1.1
Health staff
5.5
13.4
11.5
9.2
7.7
4.6
9.2
Internet
0.3
0.0
0.1
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.1
Don’t know,
no answer
0.0
0.2
0.2
0.0
0.4
0.3
0.2
Other
0.9
0.9
1.0
0.2
1.3
0.8
0.9
219
APPENDIX H
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Eco-zone
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H3. CAUSES OF FOOD POISONING
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
APPENDIX H
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Bacteria
14.2
9.3
14.5
12.0
18.7
10.7
12.7
Mold
10.3
21.7
9.8
8.0
16.6
5.2
12.4
Pesticides
51.3
50.0
38.0
34.9
39.0
35.0
42.5
Antibiotic residue
1.6
2.9
3.2
1.2
4.9
1.4
2.5
Poison mushroom
6.6
30.2
9.9
24.7
11.0
4.1
14.4
Illegal food
preservatives
8.3
8.8
7.1
3.5
16.2
4.9
7.8
Rancid food
62.2
55.2
68.9
57.3
61.2
41.4
57.9
Chemical
contaminants
20.5
14.3
15.8
14.0
16.6
16.0
16.2
Microbial
contaminants
18.4
11.3
20.4
15.4
19.0
12.1
15.8
Unsafe food
processing
24.3
12.6
31.6
24.2
42.3
26.9
25.2
Non-hygiene
eating habit
25.9
13.5
31.6
23.4
30.7
22.8
23.9
Don’t know,
no answer
5.4
13.1
10.4
10.2
10.2
22.6
12.4
Other
1.7
1.1
2.4
0.7
2.7
5.4
2.4
220
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H4. KNOWLEDGE OF PEOPLE ON HOW TO PREVENT FOOD POISONING
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
25.9
17.4
34.2
21.2
38.5
22.3
25.9
Store raw and
cooked food
separately
19.1
14.1
20.5
14.2
29.5
15.1
18.0
Cook well
64.9
64.7
71.7
61.6
71.8
52.3
64.5
Cook well and keep
in freezer
11.4
9.6
9.7
8.8
16.5
6.3
9.8
Use clean water for
cooking
24.4
17.5
22.2
35.6
30.7
22.2
23.1
Use fresh and
wholesome food
19.9
13.2
18.0
19.2
14.7
16.4
16.7
Select food carefully
27.6
25.7
35.1
23.5
46.5
32.2
31.1
Cultivate their own
safe vegetables
30.7
39.4
19.5
26.4
11.7
14.8
25.2
Don’t know,
no answer
5.4
15.2
11.0
11.4
9.6
20.8
12.8
Other
3.0
1.4
3.6
2.0
4.7
5.6
3.3
Table H5. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO CONSUMED RAW OR RARE MEAT OR FISH
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Yes
2.5
4.7
2.7
5.2
4.2
1.6
3.3
No
96.7
94.3
96.7
94.0
95.5
97.5
96.0
Don’t know,
no answer
0.8
1.0
0.6
0.8
0.3
0.9
0.7
221
APPENDIX H
Personal hygiene
during processing
food
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H6. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO CONSUMED SALAD OR BLOOD
PUDDING IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Yes
11.9
13.5
6.0
8.3
4.9
1.6
8.1
No
87.2
85.4
93.2
90.8
94.7
97.3
91.0
Don’t know,
no answer
0.9
1.1
0.8
0.9
0.4
1.1
0.9
Table H7. PROPORTION OF PEOPLE WHO CONSUMED RAW EGG OR
UNCOOKED EGG IN THE LAST 12 MONTHS
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
APPENDIX H
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Yes
2.3
3.3
0.7
1.0
1.3
4.7
2.4
No
97.0
95.8
98.7
97.7
98.0
94.3
96.8
Don’t know,
no answer
0.7
0.9
0.6
1.3
0.7
1.0
0.8
Table H8. USE OF DISTINCT CUTTING BOARDS AND KNIVES FOR RAW
AND COOKED FOOD
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Yes
57.2
46.3
52.4
46.6
66.6
62.5
54.4
No
41.6
52.7
46.6
52.4
32.8
36.4
44.6
Don’t know,
no answer
1.2
1.0
1.0
1.0
0.6
1.1
1.0
222
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H9. LENGTH OF TIME BETWEEN COOKING AND EATING FOODS
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Red
River
Delta
Option
Total
< 2 hours
92.5
86.1
90.7
88.1
89.5
93.9
90.2
> 2 hours
5.0
8.9
7.4
8.8
5.4
4.7
6.8
Don’t know,
no answer
2.5
5.0
1.9
3.1
5.1
1.4
3.0
Table H10. KEEPING LEFT OVER FOOD FOR THE NEXT MEAL
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
42.8
18.8
20.1
18.4
36.9
18.2
24.6
Keep at room temperature < 2 hours
19.9
16.7
19.6
28.5
19.7
25.7
20.7
Keep at room temperature > 2 hours
25.9
42.6
49.5
33.6
28.1
31.7
37.6
Other
11.4
21.9
10.8
19.5
15.3
24.4
17.1
Table H11. PRACTICE OF WASHING VEGETABLES AND FRUITS BEFORE
COOKING OR EATING
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Wash thoroughly
under running water
21.4
29.3
26.2
32.1
26.7
11.3
23.9
Wash by clean water
at least 3 times
82.6
66.4
75.4
57.4
83.7
84.6
75.5
Don’t know,
no answer
0.1
1.2
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.0
0.4
223
APPENDIX H
Keep in freezer
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H12. PRACTICE OF WASHING COOKING AND EATING UTENSILS
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Clean water
11.9
29.0
16.9
13.9
19.6
21.4
19.9
Clean water and
dishwashing liquid
84.7
60.7
81.3
82.6
78.5
72.4
75.1
Wash and clean by
hot water
0.9
7.9
0.3
1.8
0.1
0.2
2.3
Don’t know,
no answer
1.8
1.3
0.9
1.4
1.1
1.3
1.2
Other
0.7
1.1
0.6
0.3
0.7
4.7
1.5
APPENDIX H
Table H13. PRACTICE OF WASHING HANDS BEFORE EATING OR
AFTER USING THE TOILET
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Wash hand before
handling food
48.5
36.9
51.3
59.9
73.3
62.6
51.9
Wash hand after
using toilet
87.7
73.3
75.6
71.8
89.1
81.2
79.0
Don’t know,
no answer
1.1
9.5
6.9
2.3
1.3
3.9
5.2
224
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H14. KNOWLEDGE OF FOOD
POISONING SIGNS
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Nausea and
vomiting
73.8
60.9
76.5
72.5
79.6
62.8
69.7
Diarrhoea
86.8
70.4
78.8
73.3
73.9
59.0
73.6
Headache
22.1
24.5
32.9
29.4
31.6
14.6
25.3
Seizures
2.0
3.0
2.0
0.7
4.6
1.0
2.2
Coma
1.3
2.7
2.5
0.7
1.8
2.4
2.2
Don’t know,
no answer
7.5
19.1
13.0
15.7
16.5
28.6
16.9
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
(n=1434) (n=2066) (n=2049)
(n=599)
(n=716)
(n=1545) (n=8409)
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Total
Yes
16
(1.1%)
8
(0.4%)
36
(1.8%)
8
(1.3%)
8
(1.1%)
22
(1.4%)
98
(1.2%)
No
1392
(97.1%)
1982
(95.9%)
1975
(96.4%)
565
(94.3%)
696
(97.2%)
1456
(94.2%)
8066
(95.9%)
26
(1.8%)
76
(3.7%)
38
(1.8%)
26
(4.4%)
12
(1.7%)
67
(4.4%)
245
(2.9%)
Don’t know,
no answer
225
APPENDIX H
Table H15. FOOD POISONING EPISODES REPORTED IN THE LAST MONTH
BY HOUSEHOLD
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H16. HOUSEHOLD FOOD POISONING CASES REPORTED TO
HEALTH/LOCAL AUTHORITY
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
Total
(n=16)
(n=8)
(n=36)
(n=8)
(n=8)
(n=22)
(n=98)
Yes
25.0
62.5
36.1
50.0
25.0
9.1
30.6
No
68.7
25.0
61.1
50.0
75.0
90.9
66.3
Don’t know,
no answer
6.3
12.5
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
3.1
Table H17. HEALTH/LOCAL AUTHORITY RESPONSE FOLLOWING
INFORMATION ABOUT FOOD POISONING
APPENDIX H
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
Total
(n=4)
(n=5)
(n=13)
(n=4)
(n=2)
(n=2)
(n=30)
Visit to provide
examination, and
treatment/
support for
patients
75.0
100.0
61.5
25.0
0.0
100.0
63.3
No visit, but
consult for
treatment
50.0
0.0
23.1
50.0
0.0
0.0
26.7
No visit, no
treatment
50.0
0.0
61.5
25.0
0.0
0.0
50.0
Don’t know,
no answer
0.0
0.0
15.4
25.0
50.0
0.0
16.7
226
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
Table H18. COLLECTION OF SAMPLES FOR TESTING WHEN
FOOD POISONING OCCURS
Eco-zone
Option
Red
River
Delta
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
Total
(n=16)
(n=8)
(n=36)
(n=8)
(n=8)
(n=22)
(n=98)
Yes
12.5
25.0
2.8
0.0
12.5
4.5
7.1
No
18.8
25.0
30.6
50.0
25.0
27.3
28.6
Don’t know,
no answer
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
4.5
2.0
Table H19. RESPONSE OF FAMILIES WHEN FOOD POISONING OCCURS
Eco-zone
Central
Highlands
South
East
Mekong
River
Delta
Total
(n=16)
(n=8)
(n=36)
(n=8)
(n=8)
(n=22)
(n=98)
Stop using
suspicious food
25.0
37.5
25.0
25.0
12.5
36.4
27.6
Induce vomiting
for the patient
12.5
12.5
19.4
25.0
0.0
4.5
13.3
Wait for the
determination of
the causes
0.0
0.0
2.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
1.0
Bring patients to
the nearest
health facility
43.8
50.0
41.7
50.0
62.5
40.9
44.9
227
APPENDIX H
Option
Red
River
Delta
Northern North
Midland Central
and
and
MounCentral
tain
Coastal
areas
areas
GENERAL NUTRITION SURVEY 2009-2010
APPENDIX I: COVERAGE OF IODIZED SALT
Table I1. PERCENTAGE OF HOUSEHOLD USING IODIZED SALT BY PROVINCE
(SURVEY 2009-2010)
APPENDIX I
Province
Used by
N
%
Ha Noi
155
217
71%
Hai Phong
105
114
Hai Duong
96
Hung Yen
Used by
N
%
Da Nang
111
119
93%
92%
Quang Nam
94
95
99%
101
95%
Quang Ngai
232
290
80%
82
85
96%
Binh Dinh
114
114
100%
Ha Nam
71
71
100%
Phu Yen
89
106
84%
Nam Dinh
75
103
73%
Khanh Hoa
119
120
99%
Thai Binh
112
113
99%
Kon Tum
120
120
100%
Ninh Binh
88
88
100%
Gia Lai
117
118
99%
Ha Giang
102
102
100%
Dak Lak
113
119
95%
Cao Bang
115
120
96%
Dak Nong
119
119
100%
Lao Cai
113
115
98%
Ho Chi Minh
100
104
96%
Bac Kan
63
63
100%
Lam Dong
9
28
32%
Lang Son
113
118
96%
Ninh Thuan
22
23
96%
Tuyen Quang
116
119
97%
Binh Phuoc
118
118
100%
Yen Bai
47
49
96%
Tay Ninh
86
120
72%
Thai Nguyen
18
18
100%
Binh Duong
118
120
98%
Phu Tho
233
233
100%
Dong Nai
112
114
98%
Vinh Phuc
54
108
50%
Binh Thuan
Bac Giang
211
268
79%
Ba Ria - Vung Tau
119
119
100%
Bac Ninh
114
115
99%
Long An
61
104
59%
Quang Ninh
46
86
53%
Dong Thap
80
83
96%
Lai Chau
87
87
100%
An Giang
53
78
68%
Son La
115
118
97%
Tien Giang
Hoa Binh
115
118
97%
Vinh Long
50
118
42%
Dien Bien
119
120
99%
Ben Tre
Thanh Hoa
100
113
88%
Kien Giang
29
120
24%
Nghe An
101
113
89%
Can Tho
73
119
61%
Ha Tinh
44
44
100%
Tra Vinh
35
36
97%
Quang Binh
224
229
98%
Soc Trang
61
109
56%
Quang Tri
119
119
100%
Bac Lieu
81
94
86%
Thua Thien Hue
118
119
99%
Ca Mau
94
120
78%
Da Nang
111
119
93%
Hau Giang
118
119
99%
228
Province
TNG IU TRA DINH DNG 2009 - 2010
REFERENCES
1. National Institute of Nutrition - General Statistics Office, GNS 2000
2. World Bank, 1998. Household Welfare and Vietnam's Transition. WB Washington
3. NIN/UNICEF/HKI, Vietnam xerophthalmia Free, Report of the National Vitamin
4. GSO: Result of house hold economy 1999
5. National Institute of Nutrition, GNS 1987
6. NIN - UNICEF, National Protein Energy Malnutrition Survey Vietnam 1998
7. Ministry of health - Medical Publishing house 2001. NNS 2001 - 2010
8. UNICEF Strategy to reduce maternal and child undernutrition. Unicef, Health and nutrition working paper, EAPRO, 2003
9. Hà Huy Khôi, 2004. Đánh giá một số yếu tố dinh dưỡng có nguy cơ ảnh hưởng đến sức
khoẻ cộng đồng và các giải pháp can thiệp. Báo cáo tổng kết KHKT đề tài cấp NN, mã số
KC 10.05. Bộ Y tế, Viện Dinh dưỡng. 94-99
10. WHO: Global database on child growth and malnutrition, 1997-2010
11. Hongbo Liu, Claus Deblitz. Working Paper 40, December 2007. Determinants of meat
consumption in China
12. Caroline T.M. van Rossum, Heidi P. Fransen,,Janneke Verkaik-Kloosterman, Elly J.M.
Buurma, Marga C. Ocké - Dutch National Food Consumption Survey 2007-2010-Diet of
children and adults aged 7 to 69 years
14. J Berger, NX Ninh, NC Khan et al. 2006. Efficacy of combined iron and zinc supplementation on micronutrient status and growth in Vietnamese infants. European Journal of
Clinical Nutrition 60: 443- 454
15. Ramakrishnan U; Manjrekar R; Rivera J; Gonzales - Cassio R. and Martorell R. Micronutrients and pregnancy outcomes: A review of the literature. Nutrition Research, 1999, 19,1,
pp. 103 – 159
16. Nguyễn Công Khẩn, Hà Huy Khôi. Triển vọng và các thách thức với vấn đề giảm suy dinh
dưỡng trẻ em trong những năm tới. Nhà xuất bản Y học, Hà Nội, 2000: 29 – 43
17. Từ Giấy, Bùi Thị Nhu Thuận, Hà Huy Khôi. Xây dựng cơ cấu bữa ăn. Nhà xuất bản Y học,
Hà Nội, 1984: 194,195
18. UNDP, Tổng cục Thống kê. Mức sống trong thời kỳ bùng nổ kinh tế Việt Nam. Nhà xuất
bản Thống kê, Hà Nội, 2001
229
REFERENCES
13. Srikanta Chatterjee, Allan Rae, Ranjan Ray: Food Consumption and Calorie Intake in
Contemporary India 2007
TNG IU TRA DINH DNG 2009 - 2010
19. Viện Dinh Dưỡng. Chiến lược quốc gia về dinh dưỡng 2001 - 2010. Nhà xuất bản Y học,
Hà Nội, 2001
20. Viện Dinh dưỡng. Tình hình thiếu máu dinh dưỡng ở Việt Nam qua điều tra đại diện cho
các vùng sinh thái trong toàn quốc năm 2000. Hà Nội, 2000
21. Viện Dinh dưỡng. Nghiên cứu đặc điểm dịch tễ học và các biện pháp phòng chống một
số bệnh thiếu dinh dưỡng ở bà mẹ và trẻ em. Đề tài NCKH cấp Nhà nước 64 - D - 02 - 01,
Hà Nội, 1990
22. Viện Dinh dưỡng. Nghiên cứu các biện pháp chiến lược nhằm cải thiện dinh dưỡng và
đảm bảo Vệ sinh an toàn thực phẩm. Đề tài NCKH cấp NN KH -11 - 09. Hà Nội, 1998
23. Viện Dinh dưỡng. Chiến lược quốc gia về dinh dưỡng 2001 – 2010. Nhà xuất bản Y học
Hà Nội, 2001
24. Alderman.H; J.Behrman; V.Lavy. and R. Menon. Child nutrition, child health, and school
enrollment. Policy Research Working Paper 1700. Washington, D.C.: World Bank, 1997
25. Amigo H, et al (2001) Growth deficits in Chilean school children. Journal of Nutrition 131:
251-254
26. Alderman.H; S.Appleton; L.Haddad; L.Song. and Y.Yohannes. Links between Nations
Administrative Committee on income growth and reductions in malnutrition. World Bank
and IFPRI. Washington, D.C.: 2000.
27. Ash DM, et al (1999) Effect of a micronutrient fortified beverage on anaemia and tunting
in Tanzanian school children. FASEB Journal 13:A207
REFERENCES
28. Allen.L. and S.Gillespie. Options for interventions to improve human nutrition: A review
of efficacy and effectivenes. Paper prepared for the Asian Development Bank. IFPRI,
Washington, D.C.: 2000.
29. Anand S. and Ravallion M. Human development in poor countries: On the role of private
incomes and public services. Journal of Economic Perspectives, 1993, 7, 1, pp. 133 - 150.
30. Appleton. S. and L. Song. Income and human development at the household level:
Evidence from 6 countries. Background paper for World Development Report 2000/01.
Economics Department, University of Bath, U.K, 1999.
230