Motor performance in premature newborn of high risk

Authors

  • Carla Marques Nicolau Universidade de São Paulo; Faculdade de Medicina; Hospital das Clínicas; Instituto da Criança
  • Anna Paula Bastos Marques Costa Universidade de São Paulo; Faculdade de Medicina; Hospital das Clínicas; Instituto da Criança
  • Haline Omar Hazime Universidade de São Paulo; Faculdade de Medicina; Hospital das Clínicas; Instituto da Criança
  • Vera Lúcia Jornada Krebs Universidade de São Paulo; FM; Hospital das Clínicas; Instituto da Criança

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.20020

Keywords:

motor performance, newborn infant, premature

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: to access motor performance in premature newborns with risk to motor development impairment. METHOD: Prospective study carried between June 2007 and December 2008 with newborn infant (NI) by spontaneous breathing in air environment and corrected age until 120 days old. The study consisted on assessment of the motor performance through the Infanty Motor Performance Test (TIMP), applied for physiotherapist on the discharge hospital. Data were presented as descriptive statistics and measures of sensibility, specifics and predictive positive and negative values. RESULTS: We studied NI with gestational age (GA) average of 32.61 ± 2.69 weeks and birth weight of 1207 ± 380.14 grams, with predominance of the masculine sex (62%) and the adequate for gestational age (66,6%). The population studied (56 NI) presented punctuation on average, 7 presented punctuation below standard and 6 presented score below standard. The NI with punctuation on average presented GA average of 34.44 ± 0.59 weeks, birth weight of 1355.5 ± 294.26 grams and remain on the average of 11.22 ± 7.07 days on oxygen inhaled. The NI that acquittal below standard presented GA average of 32 ± 2.59 weeks, birth weight of 1180 ± 334.16 grams and remained 8.2 ± 4.24 days under mechanical ventilation (MV); the NI with punctuation was below standard presented GA average of 28.76 ± 2.54 weeks, birth weight of 28.76 ± 2.54 grams and remained on average of 42.5 ± 18.93 days under mechanical ventilation. We verified 54.5% sensibility, 71.4% specifics and predictive positive and negative values of 75% and 100%, respectively. CONCLUSION: The premature newborn infants who presented worse motor performance remained on prolonged ventilator support.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Pharoah POD, Stevenson CJ, Cooke RWI, Stevenson RC. Prevalence behavior disorders in low birth weight infants. Arch Dis Child 1994; 70:272-4.

Stjernqvist K, Svenningsen NW. Extremely low-birth-weight infants less than 901 g: development and behavior after 4 years of life. Acta Paediatr. 1995;84:500-6.

Neto RF, Caon G, Bissani C, Silva CA,Sousa M, Silva E. Características neuropsicomotoras de crianças de alto risco neurológico atendidas em um programa de follow-up. Pediatr Moderna 2006;2:79-85.

Hallal CZ, Marques NR, Braccialli LMP. Aquisição de habilidades funcionais na área de mobilidade em crianças atendidas em um programa de estimulação precoce. Rev Bras Crescimento Desenvolv Hum2008; 18(1):27-34.

Katz-Salamon M, Allert K, Bergström BM, Ericsson K, Hesser U, Forssberg H. Perinatal risk factors and neuromotor behaviour during neonatal period. Acta Paediatr Supp. 1997; 417:27-36.

Han TR, Bang MS, Lim JY, Yoon BH, KimI O. Risk factors of cerebral palsy in preterm infants. Am J Phys Med Rehabil2002; 81:297-303.

Bennett FC. Evolução do desenvolvimento. In: Avery GB, Fletcher MA, MacDonald MG. Neonatologia: fisiopatologia e tratamento do recém-nascido. 4th ed. Rio de Janeiro: Medsi; 1999;p. 1366-18.

Campbell SK, Kolobe THA, Osten ET, Girolani GL , Lemke M. Test of Infant Movement Performance, research edition. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois at Chicago, 1995.

Aylward GP, Conceptual issues in developmental screening and assessment. J Development Behavior Pediatrics. 1997; 18(3):340-349.

Halpern R, Giugliani ERJ, Victora CG, Barros FC, Horta BL. Fatores de risco para suspeita de atraso no desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor aos 12 meses de vida. Jornal de Pediatria. 2000; 76(6):421-428.

Piper MC, Darrah J. Motor assessment of the developing infant. Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders, 1994;210 p.

Jeng S, Yau KT, Chen L, Hsiao S. Alberta infant motor scale: reliability and validity when used on preterm infants in Taiwan. Phys Ther. 2000; 80:168-78.

Campell SK. The Test of Infant Motor Peformance. Test User’s Manual Version2.0. Chicago, IL: Infant Motor Performance Scales, 2005.

Sigma Stat: statistical software (computer program). Version 2.0. Chicago (IL): Science; 1997.

Rugolo LMSS. Crescimento e desenvolvimento a longo prazo do prematuro extremo. J Pediatr (RJ). 2005; 81 (1Supl):S101-S110.

Figueiredo DV, Formiga CKMR, Tudella E. Aplicação de um programa de estimulação sensorial em bebês pré termo em unidade de cuidados intermediários neonatais. Temas Desenvolv. 2003; 12(71):15-22.

Pedromônico MRM, Azevedo MFK, Benjamin I. Recém-nascidos pré-termo internados em unidade de terapia intensiva: desenvolvimento da conduta interativa no primeiro ano de vida. J Pediatr (Rio J). 1998; 74(4):284-90.

Silva RRF. Crianças com risco de apresentar atraso do desenvolvimento e crianças com atraso estabelecido: a experiência de um ambulatório multidisciplinar.(Tese de Doutorado). São Paulo: Universidade Federal de São Paulo. Escola Paulista de Medicina; 2004. s.n p.24-32.

Rech VV, Maldavsky CR. O comportamento neonatal de prematuros hospitalizados internação com suas mães. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2004; 8(1):75-81.

Aita M. Assessment of neonatal nurse behaviors that prevent overstimulation in preterm infants. Intens Crit Care Nurs. 2003; 19:109-18.

Guinsburg R, Peres CA, Almeida MFB, Balda RCX, Berenguel RC, Tonelloto J, et al. Differences in pain expression between male and female newborn infants. Pain. 2000; 85:127-33.

Halpern R, Giugliani ERJ, Victora CG, Barros FC, Horta BL. Risk factors for suspicion of developmental delay at 1months old. Rev Chil Pediatr 2002;73(5):529-539.

Downloads

Published

2011-08-01

Issue

Vol. 21 No. 2 (2011)

Section

Artigos Originais

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis