Nörolojik Gelişme Geriliği Riski Olan Sütçocuklarının Erken Belirlenmesinin Önemi ve Klinisyenin Rolü,

Öz

Anahtar Kelimeler

• -

Nörolojik Gelişme Geriliği Riski Olan Sütçocuklarının Erken Belirlenmesinin Önemi ve Klinisyenin Rolü,

Öz

Gelişme geriliği riski olan sütçocuklarının erken tanınması uygun rehabilitasyonunzamanında başlanması açısından büyük önem taşır. Bu sadece çocuk için değil aileiçin de yararlıdır. Gelişme geriliği açısından risk taşıyan sütçocuklarının erkendönemde ayırt edilmesi çocuk hastalar ile ilgilenen tüm klinisyenleri, özellikle çocuksağlığı ve hastalıkları uzmanlarını ilgilendirmektedir. Gelişme geriliği riskini erkenbelirleyebilmek için çocuğun doğum öncesi, doğum esnasındaki ve doğumdan sonrakiöyküsü, genel fizik ve nörolojik bakısı ve gelişimsel düzeyi ile ilgili ayrıntılı bilgi sahibiolunmalıdır. Spesifik gelişimsel tarama testleri tanıda objektif veri sağlayan diğeryöntemlerdir. Sonuç olarak, gelişimsel desteğe ihtiyacı olan çocukların özellikleyaşamın ilk yılında yakalanmaları erken tanı ve rehabilitasyona gecikmeden başlanması açısından büyük önem taşır. Çocuk sağlığı ve hastalıkları ile ilgilenen klinisyenlerin çocuğun gelişimini değerlendirme konusunda bilgili ve uyanık olmaları gerekmektedir

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Gelişme geriliği, sütçocukluğu, rehabilitasyon

Kaynakça

1. Bear LM. Early identification of infants at risk for deve- lopmental disabilities. Pediatr Clin North Am 2004; 51: 685-701.
2. Bugie C. Child development and early intervention cen- ters. Rev Neurol 2002;34 Suppl 1:143-148.
3. Johnston MV. Clinical disorders of brain plasticity. Brain Dev 2004;26:73-80.
4. Johnston MV, Nishimura A, Harum K, Pekar J, Blue ME. Sculpting the developing brain. Adv Pediatr 2001;48:1- 38.
5. Buonomano DV, Merzenich MM. Cortical plasticity: from synapses to maps. Annu Rev Neurosci 1998;21:149-186.
6. McDonald JW, Johnston MV. Physiological and patho- physiological roles of excitatory amino acids during cent- ral nervous system development. Brain Res Rev 1990; 15:41-70.
7. Kovalchuk Y, Hanse E, Kafitz KW, Konnerth A. Post- synaptic induction of BDNF-mediated long-term potenti- ation. Science 2002;295:1729-1734.
8. Sheng M, Kim MJ. Postsynaptic signaling and plasticity mechanisms. Science 2002;298:776-780.

9. Malinow R, Malenka RC. AMPA receptor trafficking and synaptic plasticity. Annu Rev Neurosci 2002;25:103-126.
10. Edwards SL, Sarwark JF. Infant and child motor deve- lopment. Clin Orthop Relat Res 2005;434:33-39.
11. Sherr EH, Shevell MI. Mental retardation and global de- velopmental delay. In: Swaiman KF, Ashwal S, Ferriero DM, eds. Pediatric Neurology, 4th edition. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier 2006; 799-819.
12. Singer T, Arendt R, Minnes S, et al. Cognitive and motor outcomes of cocaine-exposed infants. JAMA 2002; 287: 1952-1960.
13. Chasnoff IJ, Anson A, Harcher R, Stenson H, Iaukea K, Randolph LA. Cocaine and other drugs: outcome at four to six years. Ann N Y Acad Sci 1998;846:314-328.
14. Nelson K, Ellenberg JH. Obstetric complications as risk factors for cerebral palsy or seizure disorders. JAMA 1984;251:1843-1848.
15. Nelson KB, Ellenberg JH. Apgar scores as predictors of chronic neurologic disability. Pediatrics 1981;68:36-44.
16. Volpe JJ. Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy: Clinical as- pects. In: Volpe JJ, ed. Neurology of the newborn. 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2001; 331-394.
17. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committee on the fetus and newborn use and abuse of the Apgar score. Pe- diatrics 1986;78:1148.
18. Hegyi T, Carbone T, Anwar M, et al. The Apgar score and its components in the preterm infant. Pediatrics 1998;101:77.
19. Casey BM, Mcintire DD, Levano KJ. The continuing value of the Apgar score for the assessment of newborn infants. N Engl J Med 2001;344:467-471.
20. Lucas A, Morley R, Cole TJ. Adverse neurodevelop- mental outcome of moderate neonatal hypoglycaemia. BMJ 1989;297:1304.
21. Sells CJ, Robinso NM, Brown Z, et al. Long-term deve- lopmental follow-up of infants of diabetic mothers. J Pediatr 1994;125:9.
22. Robert MF, Neff RK, Hubbell JP. Association between maternal diabetes and the respiratory-distress syndrome in the newborn. N Engl J Med 1976;294:357.
23. Strauss RS, Dietz WH. Effects of intrauterine growth re- tardation in premature infants on early childhood growth. J Pediatr 1997;130:95-102.
24. Bos AR, Einspieler C, Prechtl HFR. Intrauterine growth retardation, general movements, and neurodevelopmen- tal outcome: a review. Dev Med Child Neurol 2001;43:61- 68.
25. Larroque B, Bertrai S, Czernichow P, Lege J. School difficulties in 10-year-olds who were born small for gestational age at term in a regional cohort study. Pediatrics 2001;108:111-115.
26. Hollo O, Rautava P, Korhonen T, Helenius H, Kero P, Siollanpaa M. Academic achievement of small-for- gestational-age children at age 10 years. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med 2002;156:179-187.
27. Zubrick SR, Kurinczuk JJ, McDermott BM, McKelvey RS, Silburn SR, Davies LC. Fetal growth and subsequent mental health problems in children 4 to 13 years. Dev Med Child Neurol 2000;43:14-20.
28. Finer NN, Robertson CM, Richards RT, Pinnell LE, Peters KL. Hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy in term neonates: perinatal factors and outcome. J Pediatr 1981; 98:112-117.
29. Robertson C, Finer N. Term infants with hypoxic- ischemic encephalopathy: outcome at 3.5 years. Dev Med Child Neurol 1985;27:473-484.
30. Robertson CM, Finer NN, Grace MG. School perfor- mance of survivors of neonatal encephalopathy asso- ciated with birth asphyxia at term. J Pediatr 1989;114: 753-760.
31. Scott H. Outcome of very severe birth asphyxia. Arch Dis Child 1976;51:712-716.
32. Dixon G, Psych B, Badawi N, et al. Early developmental outcomes after newborn encephalopathy. Pediatrics 2002;109:26-33.
33. Vohr BR, Wright LL, Dusick AM, et al. Neurodevelop- mental and functional outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants in the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development neonatal research network, 1993– 1994. Pediatrics 2000;105:1216-1222.
34. McGrath MM, Sullivan MC, Lester BM, Oh W. Longi- tudinal neurologic follow-up in neonatal intensive care unit survivors with various neonatal morbidities. Pedi- atrics 2000;106:1397-1405.
35. Saigal S, Hoult LA, Streiner DL, Stodskopf BL, Rosen- baum PL. School difficulties at adolescence in a regional cohort of children who were extremely low birth weight. Pediatrics 2000;105:325-331.
36. Saigal S. Follow-up of very low birthweight babies to adolescence. Semin Neonatol 2000;5:107-118.
37. Vohr BR, Allan WC, Westerveld M, et al. School-age outcomes of very low birth weight infants in the indo- methacin intraventricular hemorrhage prevention trial. Pediatrics 2003;111:340-346.
38. Volpe JJ. Neurological examination: Normal and abnor- mal features. In: Volpe JJ, ed. Neurology of the newborn, 4th ed. Philadelphia: WB Saunders, 2001; 103-133.
39. Swaiman KF. Neurologic examination of the older child. In: Swaiman KF, Ashwal S, Ferriero DM, eds. Pediatric Neurology, 4th edition. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier. 2006; 17-35.
40. Swaiman KF. Neurologic examination after the newborn period until two years of age. In: Swaiman KF, Ashwal S, Ferriero DM, eds. Pediatric Neurology, 4th edition. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier 2006; 37-46.
41. Swaiman KF. Neurologic examination of the term and preterm infant. In: Swaiman KF, Ashwal S, Ferriero DM, eds. Pediatric Neurology, 4th edition. Philadelphia: Mosby Elsevier 2006; 47-64.
42. Frankenburg WE, Dodds JB. The Denver Development Assessment (Denver II), Denver: University of Colorado Medical School, 1990.