EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LACEY ASSESSMENT OF PRETERM INFANTS TO PREDICT NEUROMOTOR OUTCOMES FOR PREMATURE BABIES AT TWELVE MONTHS CORRECTED AGE

IF 0.1 Q4 ORTHOPEDICS
T. Naushad, N. Meena, T. Kulkarni
{"title":"EFFECTIVENESS OF THE LACEY ASSESSMENT OF PRETERM INFANTS TO PREDICT NEUROMOTOR OUTCOMES FOR PREMATURE BABIES AT TWELVE MONTHS CORRECTED AGE","authors":"T. Naushad, N. Meena, T. Kulkarni","doi":"10.15621/ijphy/2020/v7i4/744","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: The Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) is used in clinical practice to identify premature babies at risk of neuromotor impairments, especially cerebral palsy. There is a shortage of studies on the Lacey assessment despite its wide clinical use. This study attempted to find the diagnostic accuracy of the Lacey assessment of preterm infants to predict neuromotor outcomes of premature babies at 12 months corrected age and to compare their predictive ability with brain ultrasound. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 89 preterm infants (45 females & 44 males) born below 35 weeks gestation. An initial assessment was done using the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) after babies reached 33 weeks postmenstrual age. Follow up assessment on neuromotor outcomes was done at 12 months (±1 week) corrected age using two standardized outcome measures, i.e., Infant Neurological International Battery and Alberta Infant Motor Scale. Brain ultrasound data were collected retrospectively. Data were statistically analyzed, the diagnostic accuracy of the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) alone and in combination with brain ultrasound was calculated. Results: Fisher's exact test showed p<.01, indicating that there is an association between the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) and the neuromotor outcomes at one year corrected age. A combination of Lacey Assessment (LAPI) and brain ultrasound results showed higher sensitivity in predicting abnormal neuromotor outcomes than Lacey Assessment alone (80% vs. 66.7%, respectively). Lacey Assessment also showed high specificity (96.3%) and negative predictive value (97.5%). Conclusion: Results of this study suggest that the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) can be used as a supplementary assessment tool for premature babies to identify those at risk of abnormal neuromotor outcomes. These findings have applications to identify premature babies eligible for early intervention services.","PeriodicalId":42989,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":"6 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15621/ijphy/2020/v7i4/744","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"ORTHOPEDICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: The Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) is used in clinical practice to identify premature babies at risk of neuromotor impairments, especially cerebral palsy. There is a shortage of studies on the Lacey assessment despite its wide clinical use. This study attempted to find the diagnostic accuracy of the Lacey assessment of preterm infants to predict neuromotor outcomes of premature babies at 12 months corrected age and to compare their predictive ability with brain ultrasound. Methods: This prospective cohort study included 89 preterm infants (45 females & 44 males) born below 35 weeks gestation. An initial assessment was done using the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) after babies reached 33 weeks postmenstrual age. Follow up assessment on neuromotor outcomes was done at 12 months (±1 week) corrected age using two standardized outcome measures, i.e., Infant Neurological International Battery and Alberta Infant Motor Scale. Brain ultrasound data were collected retrospectively. Data were statistically analyzed, the diagnostic accuracy of the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) alone and in combination with brain ultrasound was calculated. Results: Fisher's exact test showed p<.01, indicating that there is an association between the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) and the neuromotor outcomes at one year corrected age. A combination of Lacey Assessment (LAPI) and brain ultrasound results showed higher sensitivity in predicting abnormal neuromotor outcomes than Lacey Assessment alone (80% vs. 66.7%, respectively). Lacey Assessment also showed high specificity (96.3%) and negative predictive value (97.5%). Conclusion: Results of this study suggest that the Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI) can be used as a supplementary assessment tool for premature babies to identify those at risk of abnormal neuromotor outcomes. These findings have applications to identify premature babies eligible for early intervention services.
早产儿蕾丝评估预测12个月矫正年龄早产儿神经运动结果的有效性
背景:莱西早产儿评估(Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants, LAPI)在临床实践中用于识别有神经运动障碍风险的早产儿,尤其是脑瘫。尽管莱西评估在临床上广泛使用,但对其的研究却很缺乏。本研究试图发现莱西评估在预测12个月矫正龄早产儿神经运动预后方面的诊断准确性,并将其预测能力与脑超声进行比较。方法:本前瞻性队列研究纳入89例妊娠35周以下的早产儿(45例女性,44例男性)。在婴儿达到经后33周后,使用莱西早产儿评估(LAPI)进行初步评估。在12个月(±1周)矫正年龄时,使用两种标准化的结果测量方法,即婴儿神经国际电池和阿尔伯塔婴儿运动量表,对神经运动结果进行随访评估。回顾性收集脑超声资料。对资料进行统计分析,计算Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants (LAPI)单独及联合脑超声的诊断准确率。结果:Fisher精确检验显示p<。01,表明早产儿莱西评估(Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants, LAPI)与一岁矫正年龄时的神经运动结果之间存在关联。结合Lacey评估(LAPI)和脑超声结果在预测异常神经运动预后方面的敏感性高于单独Lacey评估(分别为80%和66.7%)。Lacey评估也显示高特异性(96.3%)和阴性预测值(97.5%)。结论:本研究结果提示莱西早产儿评估(Lacey Assessment of Preterm Infants, LAPI)可作为早产儿神经运动预后异常风险的辅助评估工具。这些发现对于确定有资格接受早期干预服务的早产儿具有应用价值。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信