Stability of longitudinal motor development in very low birthweight infants from 5 months to 5.5 years

C Erikson1, C Allert, E Brogren Carlberg

  • 1Department of Child Neurology, Astrid Lindgren Children's Hospital, Karolinska Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden. christina.eriksson@ks.se

Insights

Motor development in very low birthweight (VLBW) infants shows mixed stability, influenced by factors like birthweight and brain injury. Most VLBW children perform normally by age 5.5, but lag behind peers.

Area of Science:

  • Neonatal neurology
  • Developmental pediatrics
  • Motor development research

Background:

  • Assessing motor performance in very low birthweight (VLBW) infants is crucial for early intervention.
  • Longitudinal tracking of motor development in VLBW infants is essential to understand developmental trajectories.
  • Understanding the impact of prematurity-related complications on long-term motor outcomes is a key area of research.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To prospectively evaluate the longitudinal stability of motor development in VLBW infants.
  • To investigate the association between motor development and factors such as birthweight, gestational age, intraventricular haemorrhage (IVH), periventricular leucomalacia (PVL), and retinopathy of prematurity (ROP).
  • To compare the motor behavior of VLBW children with term-born controls at 5.5 years of age.

Main Methods:

  • Prospective assessment of motor performance in 165 VLBW infants at multiple time points (5, 10, 18 months, and 5.5 years).
  • Ranking of motor development results into four levels to evaluate stability.
  • Comparison of VLBW children and controls using Movement ABC percentiles at 5.5 years.

Main Results:

  • Fifty-three percent of VLBW infants demonstrated stable motor development, significantly influenced by PVL and birthweight.
  • Forty-seven percent showed unstable motor development, not associated with specific risk factors.
  • While most VLBW children performed within the normal range at 5.5 years, their performance was inferior to term-born controls. IVH and severe ROP were linked to poorer motor outcomes.

Conclusions:

  • Individualized follow-up programs are recommended for VLBW infants with poor early motor performance or severe IVH/PVL and ROP.
  • Regular ongoing monitoring may suffice for VLBW infants with normal early motor development and ultrasound findings.
  • Early motor assessment and consideration of specific risk factors are vital for guiding follow-up strategies in VLBW populations.
Abstract