File
Gomez-Conesa A1, Fernández-Rego FJ1,2, Pérez-López J3
1University of Murcia, Department of Physical Therapy, Espinardo-Murcia, Spain, 2Early Intervention Center of Lorca City Council, Lorca, Murcia, Spain, 3University of Murcia, Department of Developmental and Educational Psychology, Espinardo-Murcia, Spain
Background: Biological risk factors such as birth weight, gestational age and Apgar score, can establish the severity of adverse events occurring at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit. Also, know the relation between perinatal biological risk factors and the future motor development outcomes is essential for Early Intervention and to the prevention of disabilities.
Purpose: Know the the predictive capacity of perinatal risk factors on determining future motor development of preterm infants.
Methods: The study carried out from an Infant Development and Early Intervention Center (IDEIC). 127 preterm infants (57% males) with biological risk factors referred from four Neonatal Services of Regionals Hospitals, took part in the study. All parents signed an informed consent.
Preterm infants diagnosed with encephalopathy, genetic syndromes, congenital malformations, neuromuscular disorders, myopathies and metabolic and oncologic diseases were excluded.
Infants were assessed by the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and the Perinatal Risk Inventory (PERI). The PERI is a test designed to assess neonatal situation at birth , prior to infants' discharge from the hospital, to determinate the possibility of abnormalities or pathologies in the infant' development at very early stages. The PERI uses 18 parameters such as the APGAR index, gestational age, or birth weight, findings and ventilation to identify neonates at risk for developmental abnormalities at very early stages.
The AIMS is an observational scale to assess infants' gross motor development from birth to independent walking. It contains 58 items, which assess the control and integrity of the antigravity muscles during observation of infant motor skills in prone, supine, sitting, and standing positions.
At admission to the IDEIC, an assessment of the infants' gross motor development was carried out the AIMS scale and bearing in mind their corrected age. The PERI was performed using data from the participants' medical records when they were discharged.
Results: 90 participants were evaluated in their first trimester of corrected age, 17 in the second and 20 in the third trimester.
Intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks explain 9.3% of the variance found in the percentile AIMS score.
PERI risk factors vary over time. During the first trimester, the perinatal risk factors with a higher predictive capacity on the quality of the gross motor development were hyperbilirubinemia, intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks. These together explain 12.5% of the variance in the AIMS motor development percentile.
During the second trimester, associated medical problems and mechanical ventilation explained 23.1 % of the variance found in AIMS percentile. Birth weight and mechanical ventilation explained 2.6 % of this variance during the third trimester.
Conclusion(s): Intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks are the factors that better predict the gross motor development results measured by AIMS.
Mechanical ventilation predict worse results in the gross motor development measured by AIMS during the second and the third trimester.
Implications: Getting to know which the perinatal risk factors are showing an effect on the gross motor development will let us identify with better accuracy the preterm infants subject to follow up because of the risk of presenting motor disorders.
Keywords: Premature Birth, Perinatal risk factors, Psychomotor Performance
Funding acknowledgements: It is not funding.
No acknowledgement is required
Purpose: Know the the predictive capacity of perinatal risk factors on determining future motor development of preterm infants.
Methods: The study carried out from an Infant Development and Early Intervention Center (IDEIC). 127 preterm infants (57% males) with biological risk factors referred from four Neonatal Services of Regionals Hospitals, took part in the study. All parents signed an informed consent.
Preterm infants diagnosed with encephalopathy, genetic syndromes, congenital malformations, neuromuscular disorders, myopathies and metabolic and oncologic diseases were excluded.
Infants were assessed by the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and the Perinatal Risk Inventory (PERI). The PERI is a test designed to assess neonatal situation at birth , prior to infants' discharge from the hospital, to determinate the possibility of abnormalities or pathologies in the infant' development at very early stages. The PERI uses 18 parameters such as the APGAR index, gestational age, or birth weight, findings and ventilation to identify neonates at risk for developmental abnormalities at very early stages.
The AIMS is an observational scale to assess infants' gross motor development from birth to independent walking. It contains 58 items, which assess the control and integrity of the antigravity muscles during observation of infant motor skills in prone, supine, sitting, and standing positions.
At admission to the IDEIC, an assessment of the infants' gross motor development was carried out the AIMS scale and bearing in mind their corrected age. The PERI was performed using data from the participants' medical records when they were discharged.
Results: 90 participants were evaluated in their first trimester of corrected age, 17 in the second and 20 in the third trimester.
Intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks explain 9.3% of the variance found in the percentile AIMS score.
PERI risk factors vary over time. During the first trimester, the perinatal risk factors with a higher predictive capacity on the quality of the gross motor development were hyperbilirubinemia, intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks. These together explain 12.5% of the variance in the AIMS motor development percentile.
During the second trimester, associated medical problems and mechanical ventilation explained 23.1 % of the variance found in AIMS percentile. Birth weight and mechanical ventilation explained 2.6 % of this variance during the third trimester.
Conclusion(s): Intracranial hemorrhage and gestational weeks are the factors that better predict the gross motor development results measured by AIMS.
Mechanical ventilation predict worse results in the gross motor development measured by AIMS during the second and the third trimester.
Implications: Getting to know which the perinatal risk factors are showing an effect on the gross motor development will let us identify with better accuracy the preterm infants subject to follow up because of the risk of presenting motor disorders.
Keywords: Premature Birth, Perinatal risk factors, Psychomotor Performance
Funding acknowledgements: It is not funding.
No acknowledgement is required
Topic: Paediatrics; Neurology
Ethics approval required: Yes
Institution: Virgen de la Arrixaca University Hospital
Ethics committee: Ethics Committee for Clinical Research
Ethics number: CEIC 5/2015
All authors, affiliations and abstracts have been published as submitted.
