Assessment of Infantile Psychomotor Development Status in 6 and 12-Month-Old IUGR Infants: A Historical Cohort Study
Intrauterine growth restriction (IUGR) is responsible for different post-natal adverse outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate the post-natal psychomotor development status in 6 and 12-month-old IUGR infants who received early preventive interventions. A historical cohort study was done at an Iranian Hospital (2019). The case group included one-year-old infants with a history of IUGR at birth. This group was visited every 2 months to evaluate their growth and neurodevelopmental status. Their parents had also received some training to improve their infant's sensory and motor skills. The control group comprised one-year-old healthy infants with a history of appropriate for gestational age (AGA) at birth. Data related to psychomotor developmental indices based on the ASQ questionnaire at 6 and 12-month for both groups was extracted from subjects' records. Infants' psychomotor development status was compared between groups. Forty-one infants with a history of IUGR and 43 healthy control infants were included in this study. There were significant differences between 2 groups associated with abnormalities in all evaluated psychomotor skills, including gross motor (P=0.014), problem-solving ability (P=0.049), communication (P=0.031), fine motor (P=0.016) and personal-social (P=0.016) at 6 months. After one year of family-based interventions for the case group, significant differences between groups were notable in only fine motor (P=0.016) and personal-social skills (P=0.031). At 12 months, the psychomotor disorders related to gross motor, problem-solving ability, and communication were significantly alleviated in the IUGR group. Early preventive family-based interventions can improve the neurodevelopmental outcomes in 12-month-old IUGR infants.
2. Baumgartel K, Jensen L, White SW, Wong K, Straker L, Leonard H, Finlay-Jones A, Downs J. The contributions of fetal growth restriction and gestational age to developmental outcomes at 12 months of age: A cohort study. Early Hum Dev 2020;142:104951.
3. Leitner Y, Fattal-Valevski A, Geva R, Eshel R, Toledano-Alhadef H, Rotstein M, Bassan H, Radianu B, Bitchonsky O, Jaffa AJ, HarelS.Neurodevelopmental outcome of children with intrauterine growth retardation: a longitudinal, 10-year prospective study. J Child Neurol 2007;22(5):580-7.
4. Albu AR, Anca AF, Horhoianu VV, Horhoianu IA. Predictive factors for intrauterine growth restriction. J Med Life 2014;7(2):165-71.
5. Tolsa CB, Zimie S, Warfield SK, et al. Early alteration of structural and functional brain development in premature infants born with intrauterine growth restriction. Pediatr Res 2004;56:132-136
6. Eixarch E, Meler E, Iraola A, Illa M, Crispi F, Hernandez-Andrade E, Gratacos E, Figueras F. Neurodevelopmental outcome in 2-year-old infants who were small-for-gestational age term fetuses with cerebral blood flow redistribution. Ultrasound Obstet Gynecol 2008;32(7):894-9.
7. Levine TA, Grunau RE, McAuliffe FM, Pinnamaneni R, Foran A, Alderdice FA5.Early childhood neurodevelopment after intrauterine growth restriction: a systematic review. Pediatrics 2015;135(1):126-41.
8. von Beckerath AK, Kollmann M, Rotky-Fast C, Karpf E, Lang U, Klaritsch P. Perinatal complications and long-term neurodevelopmental outcome of infants with intrauterine growth restriction. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2013;208(2):130.1-6.
9. Gollenberg AL, Lynch CD, Jackson LW, McGuinness BM, Msall ME. Concurrent validity of the parent-completed Ages and Stages Questionnaires, 2nd Ed. with the Bayley Scales of Infant Development II in a low-risk sample. Child Care Health Dev 2010;36(4):485-90.
10. Woodward BJ, Papile LA, Lowe JR, Laadt VL, Shaffer ML, Montman R, Watterberg KL. Use of the Ages and Stages Questionnaire and Bayley Scales of Infant Development-II in neurodevelopmental follow-up of extremely low birth weight infants. J Perinatol 2011;31(10):641-6.
11. Shirazi M, Hajiha N, KhalajSereshki Z, Zarkesh MR, Shariat M, Ebrahimi M. Timing of Elective Cesarean Section and Growth and Psychomotor Developmental Indices in 6-Month-Old Infants. Arch Iran Med 2019;22(8):420-428.
12. Candel-Pau J, PerapochLópez J, Castillo Salinas F, Sánchez Garcia O, Pérez Hoyos S, LlurbaOlivé E. Neurodevelopment in preterm infants with and without placenta-related intrauterine growth restriction and its relation to perinatal and postnatal factors. J Matern Fetal Neonatal Med 2016;29(14):2268-74.
13. Hartkopf J, Schleger F, Keune J, Kiefer-Schmidt I. Impact of Intrauterine Growth Restriction on Cognitive and Motor Development at 2 Years of Age. Frontiers in Physiology 2018; 9: 1278.
14. Murray E, Fernandes M, Fazel M, Kennedy S. H, Villar J, Stein A. Differential effect of intrauterine growth restriction on childhood neurodevelopment: a systematic review. BJOG 2015:. 122
15. Makhoul IR, Soudack M, Goldstein I, Smolkin T, Tamir A, Sujov P. Sonographic biometry of the frontal lobe in normal and growthrestricted neonates. Pediatr Res 2004;55:877–83.
16. Kang R, Barnard K, Hammond M. Preterm Infant Follow-up Project2 A Multi-Site Field Experiment of Hospital and Home Intervention Programs for Mothers and Preterm Infants. Public Health Nursing 1773;10(1):151-162.
17. Oswalt K, Biasini F. Effects of infant massage on HIV-infected mothers and their infants. J Spec PediatrNurs 2011;16(3):169-78.
18. Pickler R, McGrath J, Reyna B, McCain N, Lewis M, Cone S, Wetzel P, et al. A Model of Neurodevelopmental Risk and Protection for Preterm Infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs 2010;24(4):356-65.
19. Zhang G, Shao X, Lu C, Zhang X, Wang S, Ding H, Cao Y. Neurodevelopmental outcome of preterm infants discharged from NICU at 1 year of age and the effects of intervention compliance on neurodevelopmental outcome. Zhongguo Dang Dai ErKeZaZhi 2007;9(3):193-7.
20. HughesAJ, Redsell S, Glazebrook C. Motor Development Interventions for Preterm Infants: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysisPediatrics 2016; 138(4):1-15
21. Schulzke SM, Trachsel D, Patole SK. Physical activity programs for promoting bone mineralization and growth in preterm infants (Review).Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;18;(2):CD005387.
22. Saigal S, Pinelli J, Hoult L, Kim MM, Boyle M. Psychopathology and social competencies of adolescents who were extremely low birth weight. Pediatrics 2003;111:969–975
23. Sacchi C, De Carli P , Mento G, Farroni T, Visentin S, Simonelli A. Socio-Emotional and Cognitive Development in Intrauterine Growth Restricted (IUGR) and Typical Development Infants: Early Interactive Patterns and Underlying Neural Correlates. Rationale and Methods of the Study. Frontiers in Behavioral Neuroscience 2018;12: 315
|Issue||Vol 61 No 5 (2023)|
|Intrauterine Growth Restriction Neurodevelopmental outcome Family Interventions Infant|
|Rights and permissions|
|This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.|