4.5 Article

Early intervention leads to long-term developmental improvements in very preterm infants, especially infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia

Journal

ACTA PAEDIATRICA
Volume 105, Issue 7, Pages 773-781

Publisher

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/apa.13387

Keywords

Cognitive and motor development; Early intervention; Infant Behavioral Assessment and Intervention Program; Very low birthweight; Very preterm

Categories

Funding

  1. Innovatiefonds Zorgverzekeraars [576]
  2. Zorg Onderzoek Nederland [62200032]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

AimVarious early intervention programmes have been developed in response to the high rate of neurodevelopmental problems in very preterm infants. We investigated longitudinal effects of the Infant Behavioral Assessment and Intervention Program on cognitive and motor development of very preterm infants at the corrected ages of six months to five and a half years. MethodsThis randomised controlled trial divided 176 infants with a gestational age <32 weeks or birthweight <1500 g into intervention (n = 86) and control (n = 90) groups. Cognitive development and motor development were assessed with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development at the CAs of six, 12 and 24 months and at five and a half years with the Wechsler Preschool and Primary Scale of Intelligence and the Movement Assessment Battery for Children. ResultsWe found significant longitudinal intervention effects (0.4 SD, p = 0.006) on motor development, but no significant impact on cognitive development (p = 0.063). Infants with bronchopulmonary dysplasia showed significant longitudinal intervention effects for cognitive (0.7 SD; p = 0.019) and motor (0.9 SD; p = 0.026) outcomes. Maternal education had little effect on intervention effects over time. ConclusionThe Infant Behavioral Assessment and Intervention Program led to long-term developmental improvements in the intervention group, especially in infants with BPD.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available