Riccardo Rizzi1,2, Valentina Menici2, Maria Luce Cioni3, Alessandra Cecchi4, Veronica Barzacchi2, Elena Beani2, Matteo Giampietri5, Giovanni Cioni2,6, Giuseppina Sgandurra7,8. 1. Tuscan PhD Programme of Neuroscience, University of Florence, Pisa and Siena, Florence, Italy. 2. Department of Developmental Neuroscience, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy. 3. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Children's Hospital A. Meyer, Florence, Italy. 4. Division of Neonatology, Careggi University Hospital, University of Florence, Florence, Italy. 5. Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Pisa University Hospital Santa Chiara, Pisa, Italy. 6. Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. 7. Department of Developmental Neuroscience, IRCCS Fondazione Stella Maris, Pisa, Italy. gsgandurra@fsm.unipi.it. 8. Department of Clinical and Experimental Medicine, University of Pisa, Pisa, Italy. gsgandurra@fsm.unipi.it.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Preterm infants and infants with perinatal brain injury show a higher incidence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). The Infant Motor Profile (IMP) is a clinical assessment which evaluates the complexity of early motor behaviour. More data are needed to confirm its predictive ability and concurrent validity with other common and valid assessments such as the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and Prechtl's General Movement Assessment (GMA). The present study aims to evaluate the concurrent validity of the IMP with the AIMS, to assess its association with the GMA, to evaluate how the IMP reflects the severity of the brain injury and to compare the ability of the IMP and the AIMS to predict an abnormal outcome in 5-month-old infants at risk of NDD. METHODS: 86 infants at risk of NDD were retrospectively recruited among the participants of two clinical trials. Preterm infants with or without perinatal brain injury and term infants with brain injury were assessed at 3 months corrected age (CA) using the GMA and at 5 months CA using the IMP and the AIMS. The neurodevelopmental outcome was established at 18 months. RESULTS: Results confirm a solid concurrent validity between the IMP Total Score and the AIMS (Spearman's ρ 0.76; p < .001) and a significant association between IMP Total Score and the GMA. Unlike the AIMS, the IMP Total score accurately reflects the severity of neonatal brain injury (p < .001) and proves to be the strongest predictor of NDD (p < .001). The comparison of areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) confirms that the IMP Total score has the highest diagnostic accuracy at 5 months (AUC 0.92). For an optimal IMP Total Score cut-off value of 70, the assessment shows high sensitivity (93%) and specificity (81%) (PPV 84%; NPV 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Early motor behaviour assessed with the IMP is strongly associated with middle-term neurodevelopmental outcome. The present study confirms the concurrent validity of the IMP with the AIMS, its association with the GMA and its ability to reflect brain lesion load, hence contributing to the construct validity of the assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01990183 and NCT03234959 (clinicaltrials.gov).
BACKGROUND: Preterm infants and infants with perinatal brain injury show a higher incidence of neurodevelopmental disorders (NDD). The Infant Motor Profile (IMP) is a clinical assessment which evaluates the complexity of early motor behaviour. More data are needed to confirm its predictive ability and concurrent validity with other common and valid assessments such as the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and Prechtl's General Movement Assessment (GMA). The present study aims to evaluate the concurrent validity of the IMP with the AIMS, to assess its association with the GMA, to evaluate how the IMP reflects the severity of the brain injury and to compare the ability of the IMP and the AIMS to predict an abnormal outcome in 5-month-old infants at risk of NDD. METHODS: 86 infants at risk of NDD were retrospectively recruited among the participants of two clinical trials. Preterm infants with or without perinatal brain injury and term infants with brain injury were assessed at 3 months corrected age (CA) using the GMA and at 5 months CA using the IMP and the AIMS. The neurodevelopmental outcome was established at 18 months. RESULTS: Results confirm a solid concurrent validity between the IMP Total Score and the AIMS (Spearman's ρ 0.76; p < .001) and a significant association between IMP Total Score and the GMA. Unlike the AIMS, the IMP Total score accurately reflects the severity of neonatal brain injury (p < .001) and proves to be the strongest predictor of NDD (p < .001). The comparison of areas under receiver operating characteristic curves (AUC) confirms that the IMP Total score has the highest diagnostic accuracy at 5 months (AUC 0.92). For an optimal IMP Total Score cut-off value of 70, the assessment shows high sensitivity (93%) and specificity (81%) (PPV 84%; NPV 90%). CONCLUSIONS: Early motor behaviour assessed with the IMP is strongly associated with middle-term neurodevelopmental outcome. The present study confirms the concurrent validity of the IMP with the AIMS, its association with the GMA and its ability to reflect brain lesion load, hence contributing to the construct validity of the assessment. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01990183 and NCT03234959 (clinicaltrials.gov).
Entities:
Keywords:
Alberta infant motor scale; Infant motor profile; Neurodevelopmental disorder, general movement assessment
Authors: Iona Novak; Cathy Morgan; Lars Adde; James Blackman; Roslyn N Boyd; Janice Brunstrom-Hernandez; Giovanni Cioni; Diane Damiano; Johanna Darrah; Ann-Christin Eliasson; Linda S de Vries; Christa Einspieler; Michael Fahey; Darcy Fehlings; Donna M Ferriero; Linda Fetters; Simona Fiori; Hans Forssberg; Andrew M Gordon; Susan Greaves; Andrea Guzzetta; Mijna Hadders-Algra; Regina Harbourne; Angelina Kakooza-Mwesige; Petra Karlsson; Lena Krumlinde-Sundholm; Beatrice Latal; Alison Loughran-Fowlds; Nathalie Maitre; Sarah McIntyre; Garey Noritz; Lindsay Pennington; Domenico M Romeo; Roberta Shepherd; Alicia J Spittle; Marelle Thornton; Jane Valentine; Karen Walker; Robert White; Nadia Badawi Journal: JAMA Pediatr Date: 2017-09-01 Impact factor: 16.193
Authors: Kirsten R Heineman; Pamela Schendelaar; Edwin R Van den Heuvel; Mijna Hadders-Algra Journal: Dev Med Child Neurol Date: 2018-04-06 Impact factor: 5.449
Authors: Christa Einspieler; Jeff Sigafoos; Sven Bölte; Katrin D Bratl-Pokorny; Rebecca Landa; Peter B Marschik Journal: Res Autism Spectr Disord Date: 2014-01-09