Hsiao Y-H1, Jian P-J1,2, Hsue B-J1
1National Cheng Kung University, Physical Therapy, Tainan, Taiwan, 2Changhua Christian Hospital, Physical Therapy, Changhua, Taiwan
Background: The infants born with prematurity, low birth weight, or other medical problems such as abnormal brain imaging, chronic lung disease were considered to be at high risk for developmental delay. Prechtl's quality assessment of general movements (GMsA) showed the best predictive validity as compared with other assessment tools at early age, in particularly the fidgety period. However, most of previous studies worked on the infants with prominent brain lesion or more severe medical conditions; less attention was paid to those with less critical conditions who are actually difficult to identify.
Purpose: To determine the relationship between the quality of general movements of infants at high risks for developmental delay in the fidgety period and motor performance at 2 years of age
Methods: A total of 45 participants were assessed with GMsA between 49-60 weeks postmenstrual age and later with Peabody Developmental Motor Scale, 2nd edition (PDMS-2) at 2 years old. Spontaneous movements in the fidgety period were collected by two digital camcorders and dichotomized with normal or abnormal by a physical therapist who was blind to the participants' conditions. PDMS-2 to determine motor performances yielded three categories, Gross Motor Quotient (GMQ), Fine Motor Quotient (FMQ) and Total Motor Quotient (TMQ). The participant who had the score below cut-off point of 85 was considered developmental delay (DD). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient to determine the correlation between GMsA results in the fidgety period and the measured motor outcome using PDMS-2. Statistical significance level was 0.05.
Results: Thirty out of 35 participants with normal fidgety movement were typically developing (TD) and 5 were developmental delay (DD) at 2 years of age (four had lower GMQ and normal FMQ, and one had lower GMQ and FMQ). Six of 10 participants with abnormal fidgety movement were DD (two had lower GMQ and normal FMQ, andfour had lower GMQ and FMQ). Fair correlation was found between GMsA and motor outcome at 2 years of age (r=0.44 in TMQ, 0.33 in GMQ and 0.49 in FMQ, p 0.05).
Conclusion(s): Fair correlation between fidgety movements and motor performance found in this study was not satisfactory. Besides small sample size may affect the validity of the study, the fact that the medical conditions of most participants were less severe e than those in previous studies that showed high correlation might be also an explanation. The motor developmental problem might be minor (e.g. coordination disorder) and could not be identified through PDMS-2 at this young age; the higher correlation (r=0.49) between GMsA and FMQ than GMQ (r=0.33) supports the above supposition.
Implications: Although GMsA is a non-invasive assessment tool which is suitable for fragile babies, it should be cautious to interpret the findings on the infants without prominent brain either in research or clinic.
Keywords: Infants, Quality assessment of general movement, Motor performance
Funding acknowledgements: Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan
Purpose: To determine the relationship between the quality of general movements of infants at high risks for developmental delay in the fidgety period and motor performance at 2 years of age
Methods: A total of 45 participants were assessed with GMsA between 49-60 weeks postmenstrual age and later with Peabody Developmental Motor Scale, 2nd edition (PDMS-2) at 2 years old. Spontaneous movements in the fidgety period were collected by two digital camcorders and dichotomized with normal or abnormal by a physical therapist who was blind to the participants' conditions. PDMS-2 to determine motor performances yielded three categories, Gross Motor Quotient (GMQ), Fine Motor Quotient (FMQ) and Total Motor Quotient (TMQ). The participant who had the score below cut-off point of 85 was considered developmental delay (DD). Spearman's rank correlation coefficient to determine the correlation between GMsA results in the fidgety period and the measured motor outcome using PDMS-2. Statistical significance level was 0.05.
Results: Thirty out of 35 participants with normal fidgety movement were typically developing (TD) and 5 were developmental delay (DD) at 2 years of age (four had lower GMQ and normal FMQ, and one had lower GMQ and FMQ). Six of 10 participants with abnormal fidgety movement were DD (two had lower GMQ and normal FMQ, andfour had lower GMQ and FMQ). Fair correlation was found between GMsA and motor outcome at 2 years of age (r=0.44 in TMQ, 0.33 in GMQ and 0.49 in FMQ, p 0.05).
Conclusion(s): Fair correlation between fidgety movements and motor performance found in this study was not satisfactory. Besides small sample size may affect the validity of the study, the fact that the medical conditions of most participants were less severe e than those in previous studies that showed high correlation might be also an explanation. The motor developmental problem might be minor (e.g. coordination disorder) and could not be identified through PDMS-2 at this young age; the higher correlation (r=0.49) between GMsA and FMQ than GMQ (r=0.33) supports the above supposition.
Implications: Although GMsA is a non-invasive assessment tool which is suitable for fragile babies, it should be cautious to interpret the findings on the infants without prominent brain either in research or clinic.
Keywords: Infants, Quality assessment of general movement, Motor performance
Funding acknowledgements: Ministry of Science and Technology of Taiwan
Topic: Paediatrics; Outcome measurement
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: National Cheng Kung University Hospital in Taiwan
Ethics committee: Institutional Review Board for Human Experiment and Ethics
Ethics number: B-BR-101-173
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
