Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To study the efficacy of intermittent iron supplementation in children with mild iron-deficiency anemia. METHODS: A total of 147 children with mild iron-deficiency anemia were enrolled in this prospective study. They were divided into an intermittent iron supplementation group (n=83) and a conventional iron supplementation group (n=64). The levels of hemoglobin were measured before treatment and after 1 and 3 months of treatment. The treat response rate and the incidence rate of adverse drug reactions were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: Both groups had a significant increase in the level of hemoglobin after iron supplementation (P<0.05). After 1 month of treatment, the conventional iron supplementation group had a significantly higher treatment response rate than the intermittent iron supplementation group (61% vs 42%, P<0.05). After 3 months of treatment, there was no significant difference in the treatment response between the two groups (86% vs 78%, P>0.05). The incidence rate of adverse drug reactions in the conventional iron supplementation group was significantly higher than that in the intermittent iron supplementation group (25% vs 8%, P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: For children with mild iron-deficiency anemia, although intermittent iron supplementation is inferior to conventional iron supplementation in the short-term efficacy, there is no significant difference in the long-term efficacy between the two methods, and compared with conventional iron supplementation, intermittent iron supplementation can reduce the incidence of adverse drug reactions, alleviate family financial burdens, and improve treatment compliance of children, thus holding promise for clinical application.