A validation of the PAWPER XL-MAC tape for total body weight estimation in preschool children from low- and middle-income countries.

importanceThe PAWPER tape system is one of the three most accurate paediatric weight estimation systems in the world. The latest version of the tape, which does not rely on a subjective assessment of habitus, is the PAWPER XL-MAC method which uses length and mid-arm circumference (MAC) to estimate weight. It was derived and validated in a population in the USA and has not yet been fully validated in a population from a resource-limited setting.

objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate the performance of the PAWPER XL-MAC tape weight estimation system in a large dataset sample of children from resource-limited settings.

methodsThis was a "virtual" study in which weight estimates were generated using the PAWPER XL-MAC tape and Broselow tape 2007B and 2011A editions in a very large open access dataset. The dataset contained anthropometric information of children aged 6 to 59 months from standardised nutritional surveys in 51 low- and middle-income countries. The performance of PAWPER XL-MAC method was compared with the Broselow tape and a new length- and habitus-based tape, the Ralston method. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The bias of the weight estimation methods was assessed using the mean percentage error (MPE) and precision using the 95% limits of agreement (LOA) of the MPE. The overall accuracy was denoted by the percentage of weight estimates falling within 10% and 20% of actual weight (abbreviated as p10 and p20 respectively).

resultsThe MPE (LOA) for the PAWPER XL-MAC tape, the Broselow 2007B and 2011A and Ralston method were 1.9 (-15.3, 19.2), 5.4 (-15.9, 26.7), 7.7 (-13.3, 30.5) and -0.7 (-20.2, 19.3) respectively. The p10 and p20 for each method were 79.3% and 96.9% for the PAWPER XL-MAC tape, 64.3% and 91.0% for the Broselow tape 2007B, 55.5% and 85.9% for the Broselow tape 2011A and 67.4 and 94.0% for the Ralston method respectively. The PAWPER XL-MAC system was statistically significantly more accurate than the Broselow tape 2011A, the Broselow tape 2007B and the Ralston method. The relative difference in accuracy (p10) was 43% (odds ratio 4.4 (4.4, 4.5), p<0.001), 23% (odds ratio 2.9 (2.8, 2.9), p<0.001) and 18% (odds ratio 1.8 (1.8, 1.8), p<0.001) compared to each method, respectively. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: The PAWPER XL-MAC tape performed well in this study and was statistically significantly more accurate than both the Broselow tape editions and the Ralston method. This difference was substantial and clinically important. The tape did not perform as well at extremes of habitus-type, however, and might benefit from recalibration.