Prematüre Bebeklerde Touwen İnfant Nörolojik Değerlendirmesi, General Movements Değerlendirmesi ve Alberta İnfant Skalasının Karşılaştırılması

Öz

Amaç Prematüre bebeklerin orta ila ciddi gelişimsel sorunlar açısından risk altında olduğu bilinmektedir. Çalışmanın amacı, gestasyonel yaşlarına göre ayrılan prematüre bebeklerin düzeltilmiş 3 ila 5 aylık iken aynı gün içerisinde değerlendirilen Touwen İnfant Nörolojik Değerlendirmesi (TİND), General Movement Değerlendirmesi (GMs) ve Alberta İnfant Motor Skalası (AİMS) skorlarını karşılaştırmaktır. Materyal ve Metot 3-5 ay düzeltilmiş yaşlarında gestasyonel yaşlarına göre erken prematüre (<32 hafta, n = 26), orta prematüre (320/7 ila 336/7 hafta, n = 30) ve geç prematüre (340/7 ila 366/7 hafta, n = 22) olmak üzere toplam 78 prematüre bebek çalışmaya dahil edilmiştir. Çalışmada gestasyonel yaşa göre ayrılan prematüre bebekler arasında TİND, AİMS ve GMs değerlendirmesi sonuçları karşılaştırılmış ve GMs sonuçlarına göre AİMS skorları incelenmiştir. Ayrıca TİND ve AİMS skorları arasındaki ilişki de değerlendirilmiştir. Bulgular AİMS sonuçlarına göre; grupların yüzüstü motor performansları arasında geç prematüre bebekler ile erken prematüre bebeklerden kaynaklanan bir fark bulundu; geç prematüre bebeklerin yüzüstü motor performansı erken prematüre bebeklerden daha yüksekti. GMs değerlendirmesine göre; normal fidgety hareketleri görülen bebeklerin AİMS’ten aldıkları yüzüstü (p=0,043) ve sırtüstü (p= 0,037) motor performans skorları, anormal fidgety hareketleri görülen bebeklerden daha yüksekti. TİND ile toplam AİMS skorları arasında negatif düşük bir korelasyon bulundu. Sonuç Sonuç olarak, fidgety hareketleri görülmeyen ya da anormal olan prematüre bebeklerin AİMS skoru yani motor performanslarının daha kötü olduğu ve gestasyonel yaşın AİMS skorunu etkileyebileceği görüldü. Ayrıca, TİND'a göre anormal nörolojik bulgular arttıkça AİMS skorunun düştüğü bulundu.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• General movements değerlendirmesi
• Minör nörolojik disfonksiyon
• Prematüre

A Comparison of the Touwen Infant Neurological Examination, General Movement Assessment and Alberta Infant Motor Scale in Infants Born Preterm

Öz

Objective Infants born preterm are known to be at risk of moderate to severe developmental problems. The study aimed to compare Touwen Infant Neurologic Examination (TINE), General Movement Assessment (GMA) and Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) scores assessed within one day at 3-to-5 months-of-corrected-age in infants separated by gestational week. Materials and Methods We included a total of 78 infants with a history of preterm birth, as very preterm (<32 weeks, n = 26), moderate preterm (320/7 to 336/7 weeks, n = 30) and late preterm (340/7 to 366/7 weeks, n = 22), at 3 to 5 months-of-corrected-age. The study compared the results of TINE, AIMS and GMA in preterm infants separated by gestational age, and analysed AIMS scores according to GMs results. In addition the association between TINE and AIMS scores was assessed. Results There was statistical significance between the prone motor performances of the groups, due to the statistical difference between infants born late preterm and infants born very preterm; the prone motor performance of infants born late preterm were significantly higher than infants born very preterm. Infants with normal fidgety movements had higher prone (p=0.043) and supine (p= 0.037) motor performance scores than infants with aberrant fidgety movements. A significant negative low correlation was found between TINE findings and total AIMS scores. Conclusions Infants with absent and abnormal fidgety movements have lower AIMS score and GA might affect AIMS score. Additionally, it has been showed that abnormal neurologic findings, according to TINE, are negatively related to AIMS score.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• General movements
• Minor Neurological Dysfunction
• Preterm

Kaynakça

1. 1. Beck S, Wojdyla D, Say L, Betran AP, Merialdi M, Requejo JH,et al. The worldwide incidence of preterm birth: a systematic review of maternal mortality and morbidity. Bull World Health Organ. 2010;88(1):31-8. doi: 10.2471/BLT.08.062554
2. 2. Chawanpaiboon S, Vogel JP, Moller AB, Lumbiganon P, Petzold M, Hogan D, et al. Global, regional, and national estimates of levels of preterm birth in 2014: a systematic review and modelling analysis. Lancet Glob Health. 2019;7(1):e37-e46. doi: 10.1016/S2214-109X(18)30451-0
3. 3. Liu L, Oza S, Hogan D, Chu Y, Perin J, Zhu J, et al. Global, regional, and national causes of under-5 mortality in 2000-15: an updated systematic analysis with implications for the Sustainable Development Goals. Lancet. 2016;388(10063):3027-3035. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(16)31593-8
4. 4. Howson CP, Kinney MV, McDougall L, Lawn JE; Born Too Soon Preterm Birth Action Group. Born too soon: preterm birth matters. Reprod Health. 2013;10 Suppl 1(Suppl 1):S1. doi: 10.1186/1742-4755-10-S1-S1
5. 5. Twilhaar ES, Wade RM, de Kieviet JF, van Goudoever JB, van Elburg RM, Oosterlaan J. Cognitive Outcomes of Children Born Extremely or Very Preterm Since the 1990s and Associated Risk Factors: A Meta-analysis and Meta-regression. JAMA Pediatr. 2018;172(4):361-367. doi:10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.5323
6. 6. Guellec I, Lapillonne A, Marret S, Picaud JC, Mitanchez D, Charkaluk ML,et al.; Étude Épidémiologique sur les Petits Âges Gestationnels (EPIPAGE; [Epidemiological Study on Small Gestational Ages]) Study Group. Effect of Intra- and Extrauterine Growth on Long-Term Neurologic Outcomes of Very Preterm Infants. J Pediatr. 2016;175:93-99.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2016.05.027.
7. 7. James E, Wood CL, Nair H, Williams TC. Preterm birth and the timing of puberty: a systematic review. BMC Pediatr. 2018;18(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s12887-017-0976-8.
8. 8. Goyen TA, Lui K. Longitudinal motor development of "apparently normal" high-risk infants at 18 months, 3 and 5 years. Early Hum Dev. 2002;70(1-2):103-15. doi: 10.1016/s0378-3782(02)00094-4.

9. 9. Ferrari F, Gallo C, Pugliese M, Guidotti I, Gavioli S, Coccolini E, et al. Preterm birth and developmental problems in the preschool age. Part I: minor motor problems. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med. 2012;25(11):2154-9. doi: 10.3109/14767058.2012.696164.
10. 10. Hadders-Algra M, Heineman KR, Bos AF, Middelburg KJ. The assessment of minor neurological dysfunction in infancy using the Touwen Infant Neurological Examination: strengths and limitations. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2010;52(1):87-92. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03305.x.
11. 11. Novak I, Morgan C, Adde L, Blackman J, Boyd RN, Brunstrom-Hernandez J, et al. Early, Accurate Diagnosis and Early Intervention in Cerebral Palsy: Advances in Diagnosis and Treatment. JAMA Pediatr. 2017;171(9):897-907. doi: 10.1001/jamapediatrics.2017.1689.
12. 12. Bosanquet M, Copeland L, Ware R, Boyd R. A systematic review of tests to predict cerebral palsy in young children. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2013 May;55(5):418-26. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.12140.
13. 13. Einspieler C, Prechtl HFR, Bos AF, Ferrari F, Cioni G. Prechtl's Method on the Qualitative Assessment of General Movements in Preterm, Term and Young Infants. 1st ed. London: Mac Keith Press; 2004.
14. 14. Piper MC, Darrah J. Motor Assessment of the Developing Infant. 1st ed. Saunders, Philadelphia; 1994.
15. 15. Eliks M, Gajewska E. The Alberta Infant Motor Scale: A tool for the assessment of motor aspects of neurodevelopment in infancy and early childhood. Front Neurol. 2022 Sep 14;13:927502. doi: 10.3389/fneur.2022.927502.
16. 16. Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Academic press; 2013.
17. 17. Murat Hayran MH. Basic statistics for health research. 3rd ed. Ankara: Art Ofset Matbaacılık Yayıncılık Organizasyon; 2020.
18. 18. Olsen JE, Allinson LG, Doyle LW, Brown NC, Lee KJ, Eeles AL, et al. Preterm and term-equivalent age general movements and 1-year neurodevelopmental outcomes for infants born before 30 weeks' gestation. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2018;60(1):47-53. doi: 10.1111/dmcn.13558.
19. 19. Picciolini O, Giannì ML, Vegni C, Fumagalli M, Mosca F. Usefulness of an early neurofunctional assessment in predicting neurodevelopmental outcome in very low birthweight infants. Arch Dis Child Fetal Neonatal Ed. 2006;91(2):F111-7. doi: 10.1136/adc.2005.073262.
20. 20. Hsu JF, Tsai MH, Chu SM, Fu RH, Chiang MC, Hwang FM, et al. Early detection of minor neurodevelopmental dysfunctions at age 6 months in prematurely born neonates. Early Hum Dev. 2013;89(2):87-93. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2012.08.004.
21. 21. Örtqvist M, Einspieler C, Marschik PB, Ådén U. Movements and posture in infants born extremely preterm in comparison to term-born controls. Early Hum Dev. 2021;154:105304. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2020.105304.
22. 22. Kwong AKL, Olsen JE, Eeles AL, Einspieler C, Lee KJ, Doyle LW, et al. Occurrence of and temporal trends in fidgety general movements in infants born extremely preterm/extremely low birthweight and term-born controls. Early Hum Dev. 2019;135:11-15. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2019.05.018.
23. 23. Salavati S, Berghuis SA, Bosch T, Hitzert MM, Baptist DH, Mebius MJ, et al. A comparison of the early motor repertoire of very preterm infants and term infants. Eur J Paediatr Neurol. 2021;32:73-79. doi: 10.1016/j.ejpn.2021.03.014.
24. 24. Peyton C, Millman R, Rodriguez S, Boswell L, Naber M, Spittle A, et al. Motor Optimality Scores are significantly lower in a population of high-risk infants than in infants born moderate-late preterm. Early Hum Dev. 2022;174:105684. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2022.105684.
25. 25. Yardımcı-Lokmanoğlu BN, Mutlu A, Livanelioğlu A. The early spontaneous movements, and developmental functioning and sensory processing outcomes in toddlers born preterm: A prospective study. Early Hum Dev. 2021;163:105508. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2021.105508.
26. 26. Zang FF, Yang H, Han Q, Cao JY, Tomantschger I, Krieber M, et al. Very low birth weight infants in China: the predictive value of the motor repertoire at 3 to 5months for the motor performance at 12months. Early Hum Dev. 2016;100:27-32. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2016.03.010.
27. 27. Hee Chung E, Chou J, Brown KA. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of preterm infants: a recent literature review. Transl Pediatr. 2020;9(Suppl 1):S3-S8. doi: 10.21037/tp.2019.09.10.
28. 28. Stoinska B, Gadzinowski J. Neurological and developmental disabilities in ELBW and VLBW: follow-up at 2 years of age. J Perinatol. 2011;31(2):137-42. doi: 10.1038/jp.2010.75.
29. 29. Formiga CKMR, Vieira MEB, Linhares MBM. Developmental assessment of infants born preterm: comparison between the chronological and corrected ages. J Hum Growth Dev. 2015;25(2),230-236. doi: 10.7322/JHGD.103020.
30. 30. Fuentefria RDN, Silveira RC, Procianoy RS. Motor development of preterm infants assessed by the Alberta Infant Motor Scale: systematic review article. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2017;93(4):328-342. doi: 10.1016/j.jped.2017.03.003.
31. 31. Pin TW, Darrer T, Eldridge B, Galea MP. Motor development from 4 to 8 months corrected age in infants born at or less than 29 weeks' gestation. Dev Med Child Neurol. 2009;51(9):739-45. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-8749.2009.03265.x.
32. 32. van Haastert IC, de Vries LS, Helders PJ, Jongmans MJ. Early gross motor development of preterm infants according to the Alberta Infant Motor Scale. J Pediatr. 2006;149(5):617-22. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2006.07.025.
33. 33. Syrengelas D, Kalampoki V, Kleisiouni P, Manta V, Mellos S, Pons R, et al. Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) Performance of Greek Preterm Infants: Comparisons With Full-Term Infants of the Same Nationality and Impact of Prematurity-Related Morbidity Factors. Phys Ther. 2016;96(7):1102-8. doi: 10.2522/ptj.20140494.
34. 34. Valentini NC, Pereira KRG, Chiquetti EMDS, Formiga CKMR, Linhares MBM. Motor trajectories of preterm and full-term infants in the first year of life. Pediatr Int. 2019;61(10):967-977. doi: 10.1111/ped.13963.
35. 35. de Souza Perrella VV, Marina Carvalho de Moraes B, Sañudo A, Guinsburg R. Neurobehavior of preterm infants from 32 to 48 weeks post-menstrual age. J Perinatol. 2019;39(6):800-807. doi: 10.1038/s41372-019-0376-z.
36. 36. Snider LM, Majnemer A, Mazer B, Campbell S, Bos AF. A comparison of the general movements assessment with traditional approaches to newborn and infant assessment: concurrent validity. Early Hum Dev. 2008;84(5):297-303. doi: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.07.004.