4.3 Article

Neurodevelopmental sequelae of intraventricular haemorrhage at 8 years of age in a regional cohort of ELBW/very preterm infants

期刊

EARLY HUMAN DEVELOPMENT
卷 81, 期 11, 页码 909-916

出版社

ELSEVIER IRELAND LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2005.07.007

关键词

preterm infants; intraventricutar haemorrhage; cerebral palsy; cognitive function; executive function

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Major grades of intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH) are associated with adverse neurodevelopmental sequelae in early childhood but the extent of problems in specific cognitive areas, such as executive function, and the contribution of lesser grades of IVH to neurodevelopmental problems at school age are not well described. Aims: To determine the neuromotor, cognitive and educational outcome of extremely tow birthweight (ELBW, birthweight < 1000 g) or very preterm (< 28 weeks) infants at 8 years of age related to the severity of IVH diagnosed in the newborn period. Design: Regional cohort study. Patients: Consecutive surviving children of either birthweight < 1000 g or gestational age < 28 weeks born in the state of Victoria in 1991 or 1992. Main outcome measures: Neurological impairments and disabilities, cognitive function and academic progress. Results: Of 298 consecutive ELBW/very preterm survivors 270 (90.6%) with cranial ultrasound data were assessed at 8 years of age. Cerebral palsy, poor motor performance and major neurosensory disability were more prevalent with increasing severity of IVH. Cognitive functioning across domains was worse with increasing severity of IVH. Most of the differences were attributable to the few (n =6) survivors who had grade 4 IVH; there were few substantial differences between survivors with lesser grades of IVH. Conclusions: Neurodevelopmental. dysfunction at school age in ELBW/very preterm survivors varies little with increasing severity of IVH, with the exception of grade 4 IVH. (c) 2005 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据