Related Experiment Video
Updated: Jun 10, 2026
Quantified Assessment of Infant's Gross Motor Abilities Using a Multisensor Wearable
Published on: May 17, 2024
Clinimetric properties of the alberta infant motor scale in infants born preterm
Tamis W Pin1, Katy de Valle, Bev Eldridge
1Children's Hospital at Westmead, Sydney, Australia.
Insights
The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) demonstrates high reliability for assessing motor development in preterm infants. However, caution is advised at 4 and 18 months corrected age.
Area of Science:
- Pediatric Physical Therapy
- Infant Motor Development
- Neonatal Assessment
Background:
- The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a widely used tool for evaluating motor skills in infants.
- Assessing motor development in preterm infants is crucial due to potential developmental delays.
Purpose of the Study:
- To determine the reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) for infants born prematurely.
- To evaluate the AIMS's consistency in assessing motor function across different corrected ages in preterm infants.
Main Methods:
- Fifty-nine preterm infants were assessed by two experienced pediatric physical therapists.
- Assessments using the AIMS were conducted at 4, 8, 12, and 18 months corrected age (CA).
- Intrarater and interrater reliability were calculated using intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs).
Main Results:
- High intrarater reliability was observed (ICC >= 0.99).
- Interrater reliability (ICC) ranged from 0.85 to 0.97.
- Lower reliability was noted at 4 and 18 months corrected age.
Conclusions:
- The AIMS is a reliable tool for assessing motor development in preterm infants.
- Clinicians should exercise caution when using the AIMS at 4 and 18 months corrected age.
- Careful application of the AIMS is recommended for preterm infants, especially those with atypical development or nearing independent ambulation.
Purpose:
The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a standardized motor assessment for young infants. This study aimed to examine the reliability of the AIMS in a group of infants born at or before 29 weeks of gestation.
Methods:
Fifty-nine infants born preterm were recruited. Two experienced pediatric physical therapists participated in this reliability study. Infants were assessed at 4, 8, 12, and 18 months corrected age (CA).
Results:
Intrarater reliability was high (intraclass correlation coefficient [ICC] > or =0.99). The ICC for interrater reliability varied from 0.85 to 0.97. The ICC was low at 4 and 18 months CA.
Conclusions:
The AIMS is reliable in evaluating motor development in infants born preterm. Clinicians should be cautious about using the AIMS in infants at very young ages and those approaching independent ambulation. Accurate placement of the window on a movement repertoire is crucial. Attention is required when using the AIMS in infants developing atypically.
