Avaliação do desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor de lactentes de 6 à 12 meses de idade nascidos com baixo peso de acordo com Teste de Triagem de Desenvolvimento de Denver II e Alberta Infant Motor Scale

• Ano de defesa: 2019
• Autor(a) principal: Paulo, Priscila Andrade [UNIFESP]
• Tipo de documento: Dissertação
• Tipo de acesso: Acesso aberto
• Idioma: por
• Instituição de defesa: Universidade Federal de São Paulo (UNIFESP)
• Palavras-chave em Português: Low Birth Weight; Child Development; Infant; Screening; Motor Skills; Baixo Peso Ao Nascer; Desenvolvimento Infantil; Triagem; Lactente; Habilidades Motoras
• Link de acesso: https://sucupira.capes.gov.br/sucupira/public/consultas/coleta/trabalhoConclusao/viewTrabalhoConclusao.jsf?popup=true&id_trabalho=7937498; https://repositorio.unifesp.br/handle/11600/59893

Objective: To compare the developmental assessment according to two instruments, the Denver Developmental Screening Test II (DDST II) and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) in infants between 6 and 12 months age with low birth weight (LBW) and adequate birth weight (ABW). Method: Analytical cross-sectional study. Exclusion criteria: congenital malformations, chromosomal abnormalities, chronic non-progressive encephalopathy (NPE) and Apgar score at 5 min < 7. Variables: maternal, family and infant data (birth conditions, morbidity and nutritional status at the time of motor assessment). Results: Ninety-eight children participated in this study, 38 with LBW and 60 with ABW. A positive association was observed in the comparison between the two instruments in all children, according to Cramér's V analysis (p < 0.001). There were no statistically significant differences in DDST II and AIMS assessments in children with LBW and ABW, nor with the variables analyzed. In this sample, 14 (36.8%) and 18 (47.4%) of the children with LBW had suspect DDST II and suspect/abnormal AIMS, respectively. Between children with ABW, 12 (20.0%) had suspect DDST II and 26 (43.3%) had suspect/abnormal AIMS. It was observed high rates of motor alterations in both tests and in both groups. Conclusions: The present study suggests a similarity between both assessments, the DDST II and the AIMS in children with LBW and ABW. High rates of motor alterations were observed in both tests and in both groups.