Longitudinal Cognitive Assessment in Low-Risk Very Preterm Infants

Romeo, Domenico M.; Ricci, Martina; Mirra, Federica; Venezia, Ilaria; Mallardi, Maria; Pede, Elisa

doi:10.3390/medicina58010133

Cited by 6 publications

(6 citation statements)

References 25 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Romeo et al described significant gender differences in low-risk preterm infant groups ( n = 69 very preterm and n = 71 late preterm infants) and no gender differences amongst term born infants ( n = 48) based on the scores achieved in the Bayley's scales of Infant Development, 2nd edition at two years ( 47 ). However no gender differences were reported by Romeo et al at 12 and 24 months using the Griffiths ll standardised assessment tool which the authors suggested was attributed to a higher ratio of female to male participants (F:M = 1.6:1) ( 48 ).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Neurodevelopmental outcome of low-risk moderate to late preterm infants at 18 months

Ryan,

Murray,

Dempsey

et al. 2023

Front. Pediatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundOf the 15 million preterm births that occur worldwide each year, approximately 80% occur between 32 and 36 + 6 weeks gestational age (GA) and are defined as moderate to late preterm (MLP) infants. This percentage substantiates a need for a better understanding of the neurodevelopmental outcome of this groupAimTo describe neurodevelopmental outcome at 18 months in a cohort of healthy low-risk MLP infants admitted to the neonatal unit at birth and to compare the neurodevelopmental outcome to that of a healthy term-born infant group.Study design and methodThis single-centre observational study compared the neurodevelopmental outcome of healthy MLP infants to a group of healthy term control (TC) infants recruited during the same period using the Griffith's III assessment at 18 months.ResultsSeventy-five MLP infants and 92 TC infants were included. MLP infants scored significantly lower in the subscales: Eye-hand coordination (C), Personal, Social and Emotional Development (D), Gross Motor Development (E) and General Developmental (GD) (p < 0.001 for each) and Foundations of Learning (A), (p = 0.004) in comparison to the TC infant group with Cohen's d effect sizes ranging from 0.460 to 0.665. There was no statistically significant difference in mean scores achieved in subscale B: Language and Communication between groups (p = 0.107).ConclusionMLP infants are at risk of suboptimal neurodevelopmental outcomes. Greater surveillance of the neurodevelopmental trajectory of this group of at-risk preterm infants is required.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

Neurodevelopmental outcome of low-risk moderate to late preterm infants at 18 months

Ryan,

Murray,

Dempsey

et al. 2023

Front. Pediatr.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Including such children in future studies may enhance the predictive ability of the GMDS, but it raises doubts about its ability to detect impairments in this challenging group of children at risk of developing cognitive impairments very late. In a study with a similar focus, Romeo et al [19] investigated the association between GMDS scores and later IQ in premature infants at low risk, albeit with less strict selection criteria than in our study. They found a correlation at 12 months and higher sensitivity and speci city at 24 months.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 87%

“…Some studies investigated the prognostic role of GMDS on the later cognitive outcome in healthy children [22] and children born with low weight [16,20], premature [17,19], or perinatal asphyxia [15,18]. Most studies found a predictive ability of the GMDS before 24 months, but increasing at older ages.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A tool with early predictive value is crucial due to the time needed for some neuropsychological impairments to emerge. Prematurity and hypoxic ischemic encephalopathy (HIE) have a relevant epidemiological incidence, and the predictive value of early assessments has been evaluated for these conditions [14][15][16][17][18][19][20]. Furthermore, a few studies have been done on healthy children [21,22].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Prospective Assessment of Early Developmental Markers and Their Association with Neuropsychological Impairment

Cainelli

Vedovelli

Trevisanuto

et al. 2023

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Children who experience adversities in the pre-perinatal period are at a higher risk of developing impairments later in life, despite the absence of overt brain and neurological abnormalities. However, many of these children exhibit sequelae several years after a period of normal appearance. As a result, accurate developmental assessments for the early detection of infants at high risk of adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes have become a significant concern. The Griffiths Mental Developmental Scales (GMDS) have a promising but poorly explored prognostic ability.Methods This longitudinal study evaluated the predictive power of the GMDS at 12 and 24 months on the cognitive and neuropsychological profile at 6 years of age in a sample of 70 children with a history of prematurity or perinatal asphyxia but without brain and neurological abnormalities.Results We found that the GMDS at 24 months had good predictive ability on the IQ at 6 years and the capacity to predict some neuropsychological performances. On the other hand, the GMDS at 12 months was not associated with the performance at 6 years or with the GMDS at 24 months.Conclusions Data on brain development converge to indicate that 2 years of age is a critical stage of development, particularly for children experiencing mild pre-perinatal adversities who are thought to exhibit white matter dysmaturity. For this reason, this age is crucial for identifying which children are at major risk, leaving enough time to intervene before overt deficits become apparent.

show abstract

“…These scales have been extensively validated to assess the psychomotor development of preterm infants at an early age and are regarded as one of the most accurate infant developmental tests in Europe and Portugal, particularly in the follow-up of at-risk infants. [ 23 , 47 – 49 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Impact of early-onset fetal growth restriction on the neurodevelopmental outcome of very preterm infants at 24 months: a retrospective cohort study

Cortez Ferreira,

Mafra,

Dias

et al. 2023

BMC Pediatr

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background The association between fetal growth restriction (FGR) and childhood neurodevelopmental delay is unclear and the evidence available to the present date shows conflicting results. Our aim was to analyse the impact of early-onset FGR on the neurodevelopmental outcome at 24 months of corrected age in very preterm infants. Methods Retrospective cohort study of very preterm infants (≤ 32 weeks’ gestation) admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit between 1 January 2013–31 December 2019. The control group comprised appropriate for gestational age (AGA) newborns. Griffiths III Mental Development Scale was performed at 24 months of corrected age. Results 132 infants were included: 44 FGR and 88 AGA. Mean Global Development Quotient (GDQ) was lower for FGR infants (p = 0.004) even after adjusting for maternal and perinatal factors (βadjusted -16.703; p = 0.009). The average scores for the neurodevelopmental domains were highest for personal-social-emotional skills (107.02 ± 16.34), followed by eye/hand coordination (105.61 ± 14.20) and foundation of learning skills (102.23 ± 13.74) and were lowest for gross motor (97.90 ± 11.88) and language/communication skills (96.39 ± 18.88). FGR had a significant negative impact on all domains except for gross motor skills. After adjustment, FGR continued to have a significant adverse impact on language/communication (βadjusted -21.924; p = 0.013), eye/hand coordination (βadjusted -15.446; p = 0.015) and foundation of learning skills (βadjusted -15.211; p = 0.013). Conclusions In very preterm infants, FGR was associated with a significantly increased risk of poor neurodevelopmental outcome at 24 months of corrected age compared to age-matched AGA infants.

show abstract

Longitudinal Cognitive Assessment in Low-Risk Very Preterm Infants

Cited by 6 publications

References 25 publications

Neurodevelopmental outcome of low-risk moderate to late preterm infants at 18 months

Neurodevelopmental outcome of low-risk moderate to late preterm infants at 18 months

Prospective Assessment of Early Developmental Markers and Their Association with Neuropsychological Impairment

Impact of early-onset fetal growth restriction on the neurodevelopmental outcome of very preterm infants at 24 months: a retrospective cohort study

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About