BMC pediatrics · 2015
Neurodevelopmental outcome of extremely low birth weight infants at 24 months corrected age: a comparison between Griffiths and Bayley Scales.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Picciolini Odoardo, Squarza Chiara, Fontana Camilla, Giannì Maria Lorella, Cortinovis Ivan, Gangi Silvana, Gardon Laura, Presezzi Gisella, Fumagalli Monica, Mosca Fabio
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: The availability of accurate assessment tools for the early detection of infants at risk for adverse neurodevelopmental outcomes is a major issue. The purpose of this study is to compare the outcomes of the Bayley Scales (Bayley-II vs Bayley-III) in a cohort of extremely low birth weight infants at 24 months corrected age, to define which edition shows the highest agreement with the Griffiths Mental Development Scales Revised.
METHODS: We performed a single-centre cohort study. We prospectively enrolled infants with a birth weight of 401-1000 g and/or gestational age < 28 weeks. Exclusion criteria were the presence of neurosensory disabilities and/or genetic abnormalities. Infants underwent neurodevelopmental evaluation at 24 months corrected age using the Griffiths and either the Bayley-II (birth years 2003-2006) or the Bayley-III (birth years 2007-2010).
RESULTS: A total of 194 infants were enrolled. Concordance was excellent between the Griffiths and the Bayley-III composite scores for both cognitive language and motor abilities (weighted K = 0.80 and 0.81, respectively) but poorer for the Bayley-II (weighted K = 0.63 and 0.50, respectively). The Youden's Index revealed higher values for the Bayley-III than for the Bayley-II (75.9 vs 69.6%). Compared with the Griffiths, the Bayley-III found 3% fewer infants as being severely impaired in cognitive-language abilities and 7.8% fewer infants as being mildly impaired in motor skills while the Bayley-II showed, compared with the Griffiths, higher rates of severely impaired children both for cognitive-language and motor abilities (14.1 and 15.3% more infants respectively).
DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that the Bayley-III, although having a higher agreement with the Griffiths compared to the Bayley-II, slightly tends to underestimate neurodevelopmental impairment compared with the Griffiths, whereas the Bayley-II tends to overestimate it.
CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these findings, we recommend the use of multiple measures to assess neurodevelopmental outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants at 24 months.
METHODS: We performed a single-centre cohort study. We prospectively enrolled infants with a birth weight of 401-1000 g and/or gestational age < 28 weeks. Exclusion criteria were the presence of neurosensory disabilities and/or genetic abnormalities. Infants underwent neurodevelopmental evaluation at 24 months corrected age using the Griffiths and either the Bayley-II (birth years 2003-2006) or the Bayley-III (birth years 2007-2010).
RESULTS: A total of 194 infants were enrolled. Concordance was excellent between the Griffiths and the Bayley-III composite scores for both cognitive language and motor abilities (weighted K = 0.80 and 0.81, respectively) but poorer for the Bayley-II (weighted K = 0.63 and 0.50, respectively). The Youden's Index revealed higher values for the Bayley-III than for the Bayley-II (75.9 vs 69.6%). Compared with the Griffiths, the Bayley-III found 3% fewer infants as being severely impaired in cognitive-language abilities and 7.8% fewer infants as being mildly impaired in motor skills while the Bayley-II showed, compared with the Griffiths, higher rates of severely impaired children both for cognitive-language and motor abilities (14.1 and 15.3% more infants respectively).
DISCUSSION: Our study suggests that the Bayley-III, although having a higher agreement with the Griffiths compared to the Bayley-II, slightly tends to underestimate neurodevelopmental impairment compared with the Griffiths, whereas the Bayley-II tends to overestimate it.
CONCLUSIONS: On the basis of these findings, we recommend the use of multiple measures to assess neurodevelopmental outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants at 24 months.