Related Experiment Video
Updated: Aug 18, 2026
Measuring the Functional Abilities of Children Aged 3-6 Years Old with Observational Methods and Computer Tools
Published on: June 20, 2020
Effects of Safe Early Intervention Approach: A 3-Year Follow-Up
Bulent Elbasan1, Ecem Yildiz Cangur1, Pelin Atalan Efkere1
1Department of Physiotherapy and Rehabilitation, Faculty of Health Sciences, Gazi University, Ankara, Turkey.
Insights
The SAFE early intervention approach and Neurodevelopmental Treatment (NDT) both support infant development. SAFE showed potential advantages in sensory processing, though no significant differences in overall developmental trajectories were found between the two approaches.
Area of Science:
- Developmental Pediatrics
- Early Intervention Strategies
- Neurodevelopmental Risk
Background:
- Early intervention is crucial for improving developmental outcomes in at-risk infants.
- The SAFE (Sensory and Adaptive Functioning Enhancement) approach has demonstrated effectiveness across various developmental domains.
- This study provides a 3-year follow-up to compare the long-term outcomes of the SAFE approach.
Purpose of the Study:
- To comparatively report the 3-year follow-up outcomes of the SAFE early intervention approach.
- To assess the long-term efficacy of the SAFE intervention compared to Neurodevelopmental Treatment (NDT).
- To evaluate developmental trajectories and sensory processing in infants receiving either SAFE or NDT.
Main Methods:
- Follow-up study including 2- and 3-year-old children identified with neurodevelopmental risk.
- Interventions compared: SAFE early intervention approach vs. Neurodevelopmental Treatment (NDT)-based intervention.
- Development assessed using Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development (Bayley-III); sensory processing evaluated with Dunn's Sensory Profile.
Main Results:
- Both SAFE and NDT groups showed significant cognitive and language score improvements from 2 to 3 years.
- No significant differences in cognitive, language, or motor scores were found between SAFE and NDT groups.
- SAFE group demonstrated significant advantages in selected sensory processing domains at both 2 and 3 years.
Conclusions:
- Both SAFE and NDT interventions positively influenced developmental progress over time.
- While developmental trajectories did not differ significantly between groups, SAFE showed promise in enhancing sensory processing.
- Larger sample sizes and extended follow-up are recommended to validate these findings.
Purpose:
Early intervention improves developmental outcomes in infants at risk. The SAFE early intervention approach has been found to be effective across multiple developmental domains. The aim of this study was to comparatively report the 3-year follow-up outcomes of the SAFE early intervention approach.
Methods:
The study included children aged 2 and 3 years who had been identified as being at neurodevelopmental risk during early infancy and had received either the SAFE early intervention approach or a Neurodevelopmental Treatment (NDT)-based intervention. This follow-up study was based on a doctoral dissertation that originally enrolled 41 infants. At follow-up, 22 children were assessed at 2 years of age (13 SAFE, 9 NDT) and 19 children at 3 years of age (11 SAFE, 8 NDT). Development was evaluated using the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, Third Edition (Bayley-III), and sensory processing was assessed using Dunn's Sensory Profile (7-36 months). Longitudinal changes in Bayley-III composite scores were analyzed using two-way repeated-measures analysis of variance following multiple imputation for missing data, while sensory processing outcomes were compared cross-sectionally.
Results:
Cognitive and language composite scores improved significantly from 2 to 3 years of age in both the SAFE and NDT groups (p < 0.05), whereas no significant change was observed in motor composite scores. No significant between-group differences were identified in cognitive, language, or motor composite scores at either assessment point, and no significant group × time interactions were found for any Bayley-III composite score (p > 0.05). Cross-sectional analyses of sensory processing revealed significant differences in selected domains in favor of the SAFE group at both 2 and 3 years of age (p < 0.05).
Conclusion:
Both the SAFE and NDT approaches supported developmental progress over time. Although no differences were observed in developmental trajectories between the groups, the SAFE approach showed potential advantages in selected aspects of sensory processing. Further studies with larger samples and longer follow-up periods are needed to confirm these findings.
