Standardized Map of Iodine Status in Europe.

Background: Knowledge about the population's iodine status is important, because it allows adjustment of iodine supply and prevention of iodine deficiency. The validity and comparability of iodine-related population studies can be improved by standardization, which was one of the goals of the EUthyroid project. The aim of this study was to establish the first standardized map of iodine status in Europe by using standardized urinary iodine concentration (UIC) data. Materials and Methods: We established a gold-standard laboratory in Helsinki measuring UIC by inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry. A total of 40 studies from 23 European countries provided 75 urine samples covering the whole range of concentrations. Conversion formulas for UIC derived from the gold-standard values were established by linear regression models and were used to postharmonize the studies by standardizing the UIC data of the individual studies. Results: In comparison with the EUthyroid gold-standard, mean UIC measurements were higher in 11 laboratories and lower in 10 laboratories. The mean differences ranged from -36.6% to 49.5%. Of the 40 postharmonized studies providing data for the standardization, 16 were conducted in schoolchildren, 13 in adults, and 11 in pregnant women. Median standardized UIC was <100 µg/L in 1 out of 16 (6.3%) studies in schoolchildren, while in adults 7 out of 13 (53.8%) studies had a median standardized UIC <100 µg/L. Seven out of 11 (63.6%) studies in pregnant women revealed a median UIC <150 µg/L. Conclusions: We demonstrate that iodine deficiency is still present in Europe, using standardized data from a large number of studies. Adults and pregnant women, particularly, are at risk for iodine deficiency, which calls for action. For instance, a more uniform European legislation on iodine fortification is warranted to ensure that noniodized salt is replaced by iodized salt more often. In addition, further efforts should be put on harmonizing iodine-related studies and iodine measurements to improve the validity and comparability of results.

Ensuring Effective Prevention of Iodine Deficiency Disorders.

BACKGROUND: Programs initiated to prevent iodine deficiency disorders (IDD) may not remain effective due to changes in government policies, commercial factors, and human behavior that may affect the efficacy of IDD prevention programs in unpredictable directions. Monitoring and outcome studies are needed to optimize the effectiveness of IDD prevention. SUMMARY: Although the need for monitoring is compelling, the current reality in Europe is less than optimal. Regular and systematic monitoring surveys have only been established in a few countries, and comparability across the studies is hampered by the lack of centralized standardization procedures. In addition, data on outcomes and the cost of achieving them are needed in order to provide evidence of the beneficial effects of IDD prevention in countries with mild iodine deficiency. CONCLUSION: Monitoring studies can be optimized by including centralized standardization procedures that improve the comparison between studies. No study of iodine consumption can replace the direct measurement of health outcomes and the evaluation of the costs and benefits of the program. It is particularly important that health economic evaluation should be conducted in mildly iodine-deficient areas and that it should include populations from regions with different environmental, ethnic, and cultural backgrounds.