Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Randomized controlled trial compares treatment efficacy of ferrous sulphate and iron polymaltose complex, showing greater effectiveness for hemoglobin levels in children.
Background: Iron deficiency anemia (IDA) is the most common nutritional deficiency in children worldwide. Oral iron therapy remains the cornerstone of treatment, with ferrous sulphate and iron polymaltose complex (IPC) commonly prescribed. However, their comparative efficacy remains a matter of debate. Objective: To compare the effectiveness of ferrous sulphate and iron polymaltose complex in children for the treatment of IDA. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial. Setting: Department of Pediatrics at Saidu Group of Teaching Hospitals, Swat, Pakistan. Duration of Study: 21 July 2024 to 21 January 2025. Methods: A total of 72 children aged 2–10 years with confirmed IDA were enrolled and randomly allocated into two equal groups. Group A received oral ferrous sulphate at 6 mg/kg/day, while Group B was administered an equivalent dose of IPC. Treatment efficacy was defined as achieving a hemoglobin level of≥10.5 g/dL and a serum ferritin level of>15 ng/mL after four weeks of therapy. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 25, and the chi-square test was applied; P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. Results: The mean age of children in Group A was 5.42 ± 2.51 years, while in Group B it was 6.47 ± 2.36 years. Treatment efficacy was achieved in 88.9% of children in the ferrous sulphate group compared to 63.9% in the IPC group (P = 0.01). Conclusion: Ferrous sulphate was significantly more effective than iron polymaltose complex in improving hematological parameters among children with IDA, supporting its role as the preferred first-line oral therapy.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Amjad et al. (2025) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: