4.5 Article

Comparison of Bayley-2 and Bayley-3 scores at 18 months in term infants following neonatal encephalopathy and therapeutic hypothermia

期刊

DEVELOPMENTAL MEDICINE AND CHILD NEUROLOGY
卷 55, 期 11, 页码 1053-1059

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/dmcn.12208

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

AimNeuroprotection trials for neonatal encephalopathy use moderate or severe disability as an outcome, with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, Second Edition (Bayley-2) Index scores of <70 as part of the criteria. The Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler, 3rd Development, Third Edition (Bayley-3) have superseded Bayley-2 and yield higher than expected scores in typically developing and high-risk infants. The aim of this study, therefore, was to compare Bayley-2 scores and Bayley-3 scores in term-born infants surviving neonatal encephalopathy treated with hypothermia. MethodSixty-one term-born infants (37 males, 24 females; median gestational age at birth 40wks, range 36-42wks; median birthweight 3280g, range 2295-5050) following neonatal encephalopathy and hypothermia had contemporaneous assessment at 18months using the Bayley-2 and Bayley-3. ResultsThe median Bayley-3 Cognitive Composite score was 7 points higher than the median Bayley-2 Mental Developmental Index (MDI) score and the median Bayley-3 Motor Composite score was 18 points higher than the median Bayley-2 Psychomotor Developmental Index (PDI) score. Ten children had a Bayley-2 MDI of <70; only three children had Bayley-3 combined Cognitive/Language scores of <70. Eleven children had Bayley-2 PDI scores of <70 and four had modified Bayley-3 Motor Composite scores of <70. Applying regression equations to Bayley-3 scores adjusted rates of severe delay to similar proportions found using Bayley-2 scores. InterpretationFewer children were classified with severe delay using the Bayley-3 than the Bayley-2, which prohibits direct comparison of scores. Increased Bayley-3 cut-off thresholds for classifying severe disability are recommended when comparing studies in this clinical group using Bayley-2 scores.

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

4.5
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