Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 10, 2026
A Battery of Motor Tests in a Neonatal Mouse Model of Cerebral Palsy
Published on: November 3, 2016
Comparing two motor assessment tools to evaluate neurobehavioral intervention effects in infants with very low birth
Janeline W P Van Hus1, Martine Jeukens-Visser, Karen Koldewijn
1J.W.P. Van Hus, PT, Department of Rehabilitation A-01, Academic Medical Centre, University of Amsterdam, Post Box 22660, 1100 DD, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Insights
The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is more responsive than the Bayley Scales of Infant Development (BSID-II-NL) for detecting motor improvements in very low birth weight (VLBW) infants after early intervention.
Area of Science:
- Pediatrics
- Developmental Neuroscience
- Rehabilitation Medicine
Background:
- Infants with very low birth weight (VLBW) face heightened risks of motor deficits.
- Early intervention programs can mitigate these risks.
- Sensitive assessment tools are crucial for monitoring intervention efficacy in VLBW infants.
Purpose of the Study:
- To compare the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and the Psychomotor Developmental Index (PDI) of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Dutch Second Edition (BSID-II-NL).
- To evaluate their effectiveness in assessing early intervention effects on motor development in VLBW infants at 12 months corrected age (CA).
Main Methods:
- Secondary analysis of data from a randomized controlled trial (RCT).
- 116 VLBW infants were assessed using both AIMS and PDI at 12 months CA.
- Intervention effects on both scales were compared.
Main Results:
- Both AIMS and PDI showed significant intervention effects after correcting for baseline differences.
- The AIMS subscale 'sit' demonstrated the highest effect size.
- A significant reduction in abnormal motor development was detected solely by the AIMS.
Conclusions:
- The AIMS exhibited superior responsiveness in detecting intervention effects compared to the PDI.
- The study advises caution when using only the PDI for monitoring VLBW infants.
- Combined use of AIMS and BSID-II-NL is recommended for comprehensive evaluation of motor development interventions.
Background:
Infants with very low birth weight (VLBW) are at increased risk for motor deficits, which may be reduced by early intervention programs. For detection of motor deficits and to monitor intervention, different assessment tools are available. It is important to choose tools that are sensitive to evaluate the efficacy of intervention on motor outcome.
Objective:
The purpose of this study was to compare the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and the Psychomotor Developmental Index (PDI) of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development-Dutch Second Edition (BSID-II-NL) in their ability to evaluate effects of an early intervention, provided by pediatric physical therapists, on motor development in infants with VLBW at 12 months corrected age (CA).
Design:
This was a secondary study in which data collected from a randomized controlled trial (RCT) were used.
Methods:
At 12 months CA, 116 of 176 infants with VLBW participating in an RCT on the effect of the Infant Behavioral Assessment and Intervention Program were assessed with both the AIMS and the PDI. Intervention effects on the AIMS and PDI were compared.
Results:
Corrected for baseline differences, significant intervention effects were found for AIMS and PDI scores. The highest effect size was for the AIMS subscale sit. A significant reduction of abnormal motor development in the intervention group was found only with the AIMS.
Limitations:
No Dutch norms are available for the AIMS.
Conclusions:
The responsiveness of the AIMS to detect intervention effects was better than that of the PDI. Therefore, caution is recommended in monitoring infants with VLBW only with the PDI, and the use of both the AIMS and the Bayley Scales of Infant Development is advised when evaluating intervention effects on motor development at 12 months CA.
