The motor repertoire in 3- to 5-month old infants with Down syndrome

Dafne Herrero1, Christa Einspieler2, Carolina Y Panvequio Aizawa3

  • 1School of Public Health, University of São Paulo, São Paulo, Brazil.

Insights

Infants with Down syndrome show varied motor skills and postures in early development. Their motor optimality score is lower than typically developing infants but higher than those with cerebral palsy.

Area of Science:

  • Developmental Pediatrics
  • Genetics
  • Neurology

Background:

  • Down syndrome is the most common genetic cause of intellectual disability.
  • Early developmental studies in Down syndrome are limited.
  • Understanding early motor development is crucial for intervention.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To describe motor repertoire in 3- to 5-month-old infants with Down syndrome.
  • To assess the relationship between pre- and perinatal factors and motor performance.
  • To characterize fidgety movements and postures in infants with Down syndrome.

Main Methods:

  • Exploratory study of 47 infants with Down syndrome (3-5 months old).
  • Video assessment of spontaneous movements and postures, including fidgety movements.
  • Calculation of the Motor Optimality Score (MOS).
  • Comparison with control groups: infants with cerebral palsy and typically developing infants.

Main Results:

  • Infants with Down syndrome had a significantly lower MOS than typically developing infants but higher than infants with cerebral palsy.
  • Abnormal fidgety movements (absent, exaggerated, or slow/fast) were observed in a majority of infants.
  • Atypical postures and lack of midline movements were noted.
  • Preterm birth and congenital heart disease did not correlate with motor performance in this cohort.

Conclusions:

  • Significant heterogeneity exists in the early motor repertoire of infants with Down syndrome.
  • The findings highlight the variability of the early Down syndrome phenotype.
  • Further research is needed to explore the predictive value of early motor repertoire for cognitive outcomes.
Abstract