Effect of a developmental program on motor performance in infants born preterm

Lekskulchai, Raweewan; Cole, Joan

doi:10.1016/s0004-9514(14)60264-6

Cited by 125 publications

(96 citation statements)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…One study identified infants at risk of motor impairment based on their TIMP score, and intervention was again targeted to the impairment. 28 This study found a significant effect of intervention on motor out- come at 4 months. It may be that targeting intervention and using outcome measures more specific to the outcomes is a more responsive way to assess intervention.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review

Orton

Spittle

Doyle

et al. 2009

Develop Med Child Neuro

192

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim The aim of this study was to review the effects of early developmental intervention after discharge from hospital on motor and cognitive development in preterm infants. Method Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) or quasi‐RCTs of early developmental intervention programmes for preterm infants in which motor or cognitive outcomes were reported and in which the intervention commenced before or after discharge were included. A systematic review and meta‐analysis of studies grouped by intervention, age of outcome, and study quality was undertaken. Databases searched (up to January 2009) included the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Embase. Results Eighteen studies met the inclusion criteria (2686 patients randomized), but only 11 studies had data suitable for meta‐analysis. Early developmental intervention improved cognitive outcomes at infant age (developmental quotient: standardized mean difference [SMD] 0.42, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33–0.52; p<0.001), and at preschool age (IQ: SMD 0.46, 95% CI 0.33–0.59; p<0.001). However, the benefit was not sustained at school age (IQ: SMD 0.02, 95% CI –0.10 to 0.14; p=0.71). Early intervention had little effect on motor outcome at infant or school age, and there was no study reporting motor outcome at preschool age. Interpretation Current evidence suggests that the benefits of developmental intervention postdischarge are restricted to short‐term gains in cognitive outcome.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 56%

Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review

Orton

Spittle

Doyle

et al. 2009

Develop Med Child Neuro

192

112

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…TIMP has been used in two randomized controlled trials of intervention and has demonstrated a significant difference between groups. 29,30 The AIMS and GMs have also been used as outcome assessments in trials of intervention; however, no difference was reported between groups. 23,31 It is unclear from these studies whether the intervention was not effective or whether the tool was not sensitive enough to detect change.…”

Section: Responsivenessmentioning

confidence: 99%

A systematic review of the clinimetric properties of neuromotor assessments for preterm infants during the first year of life

Spittle

Doyle

Boyd

2008

Develop Med Child Neuro

295

292

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review evaluates assessments used to discriminate, predict, or evaluate the motor development of preterm infants during the first year of life. Eighteen assessments were identified; nine met the inclusion criteria. The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS), Bayley Scale of Infant and Toddler Development ‐ Version III, Peabody Developmental Motor Scales ‐ Version 2, Test of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP), and Toddler and Infant Motor Examination have good discriminative validity when examined in large populations. The AIMS, Prechtl's Assessment of General Movements (GMs), Neuro Sensory Motor Development Assessment (NSMDA), and TIMP were designed for preterm infants and are able to detect more subtle changes in movement quality. The best predictive assessment tools are age dependent: GMs, the Movement Assessment of Infants, and TIMP are strongest in early infancy (age 4mo or less) and the AIMS and NSMDA are better at older ages (8‐12mo). The TIMP is the only tool that has demonstrated a difference between groups in response to intervention in two randomized controlled trials. The AIMS, TIMP, and GMs demonstrated the highest levels of overall reliability (interrater and intrarater intraclass correlation coefficient or κ>0.85). Selection of motor assessment tools during the first year of life for infants born preterm will depend on the intended purpose of their use for discrimination, prediction, and/or evaluation.

show abstract

“…14 Interventions initiated while the infants were in the hospital showed a slightly larger impact than those implemented after discharge, and a study with parents actively involved in the intervention found favorable change in motor performance in the treatment group compared with the control group. 15 More research is needed to elucidate the optimal age and type of intervention for improving outcomes associated with motor development. The primary goal of our randomized controlled trial (NOPPI [Norwegian Physiotherapy Study in Preterm Infants]) 16 was to assess the effect of parent-administered PT in the preterm period on motor performance at 24 months' corrected age (CA) in infants born very preterm.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Early Parent-Administered Physical Therapy for Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial

et al. 2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the short-term effect of parent-administered physical therapy in the preterm period on motor performance in medically stable infants. METHODS:This study was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized controlled trial including 153 infants born at gestational age ≤32 weeks and randomized to an intervention (n = 74) or a control (n = 79) group. The intervention promoted postural control, head control, and midline orientation. Parents, supervised by a physical therapist, conducted the intervention 10 minutes twice a day for 3 weeks from 34 to 36 weeks' postmenstrual age (PMA). The control group received usual care. The Test of Infant Motor Performance Screening Items was used at baseline and the Test of Infant Motor Performance postintervention (week 37 PMA). Linear mixed models were used to assess change in motor performance between groups from 34 to 37 weeks' PMA by using z scores. Effect size was measured by using Cohen's d. RESULTS:The mean baseline z score was 0.06 (95% confidence interval, -0.48 to 0.60). After the intervention, there was a significant group difference, indicating a change in motor performance from week 34 to 37 PMA favoring the intervention group. The estimated difference in z scores was 0.42 (95% confidence interval, 0.13 to 0.72; P = .005), and the effect size was 0.40.CONCLUSIONS: Parent-administered physical therapy conducted before term-equivalent age improved motor performance at 37 weeks' PMA more than conventional care. All infants will be followed up until 2 years' corrected age to evaluate the long-term effects of this brief intervention. Mrs Ustad participated in planning the study, baseline and postintervention assessments, statistical analyses, and drafting of the manuscript; Dr Evensen was involved in supervision of statistical analyses and preparation of the manuscript; Drs Campbell and Girolami participated in planning the study, in preparation of the manuscript, and in proofreading; Dr Helbostad supervised the statistical analyses and preparation of the manuscript; Drs Kaaresen and Jørgensen participated in planning the study and in preparation of the manuscript; and Dr Øberg was responsible for design and planning the study and participated in postintervention assessments from video recordings, statistical analyses, and preparation of the manuscript. All authors approved the fi nal manuscript as submitted and agree to be accountable for all aspects of the work. WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: Studies on early intervention to improve motor function in preterm infants have failed to show large effects. Interventions involving parents seem to be more effective than when therapists conduct the intervention. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:Three weeks of parentadministered physical therapy implemented before term-equivalent age in very preterm infants improved short-term motor performance more than in the control group. The intervention was feasible and well tolerated by the infants.by guest on May 10, 2018 http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/ Downloaded from U...

show abstract

Effect of a developmental program on motor performance in infants born preterm

Cited by 125 publications

References 16 publications

Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review

Do early intervention programmes improve cognitive and motor outcomes for preterm infants after discharge? A systematic review

A systematic review of the clinimetric properties of neuromotor assessments for preterm infants during the first year of life

Early Parent-Administered Physical Therapy for Preterm Infants: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About