4.4 Article

Early developmental trajectories of preterm infants

Journal

RESEARCH IN DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES
Volume 81, Issue -, Pages 12-23

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ridd.2017.10.018

Keywords

Preterm infants; Developmental trajectories; Cognitive development; Language development; Motor development; Neonatal neurobehavior

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background and objectives: Preterm infants are at risk for neuro-developmental impairments and atypical developmental trajectories. The aims of this study were to delineate early developmental trajectories of preterm and full-term infants. Methods: The cognitive, language, and motor development of 149 infants - 19 extremely preterm (EPT), 34 very preterm (VPT), 57 moderately preterm (MPT), and 39 full-term (FT)- was evaluated using Mullen Scales at 1, 4, 8, 12, and 18 months. Mixed models were applied to examine group differences. Gender, maternal education, and neurobehavior were included as predictors of developmental trajectories. Results: The EPT and VPT infants achieved significantly lower scores than the FT infants in all domains, with a significantly increasing gap over time. The MPT infante trajectories were more favorable than those of the EPT and VPT infants yet lower than the FT infants on the Visual Reception, Gross, and Fine Motor subscales. Male gender and lower maternal education were associated with lower scores that declined over time. Abnormal neonatal neurobehavior was associated lower Mullen scores and with less stability in scores over time. Conclusions: The EPT and VPT infants were found to have disadvantages across all domains. The MPT infants revealed more favorable developmental trajectories yet displayed vulnerability compared to the FT infants. Gender, maternal education, and neonatal neurobehavior are important in predicting the developmental outcomes of preterm infants.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.4
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available