Early Intervention Involving Specific Task-Environment-Participation (STEP) Protocol for Infants at Risk: A Feasibility Study.

IF 1.5 4区 医学 Q2 PEDIATRICS
Camila Resende Gâmbaro Lima, Raissa Wanderley Ferraz de Abreu, Bruna Nayara Verdério, Beatriz Helena Brugnaro, Mariana Martins Dos Santos, Adriana Neves Dos Santos, Catherine Morgan, Nelci Adriana Cicuto Ferreira Rocha
{"title":"Early Intervention Involving Specific Task-Environment-Participation (STEP) Protocol for Infants at Risk: A Feasibility Study.","authors":"Camila Resende Gâmbaro Lima,&nbsp;Raissa Wanderley Ferraz de Abreu,&nbsp;Bruna Nayara Verdério,&nbsp;Beatriz Helena Brugnaro,&nbsp;Mariana Martins Dos Santos,&nbsp;Adriana Neves Dos Santos,&nbsp;Catherine Morgan,&nbsp;Nelci Adriana Cicuto Ferreira Rocha","doi":"10.1080/01942638.2022.2142084","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims:</b> To verify the feasibility and preliminary effects of the STEP protocol, an intervention based on specific motor skills, environmental factors and participation, in infants at biological risk.<b>Methods:</b> Twenty-eight at-risk infants (STEP Protocol = 14; Standard Intervention = 14), aged 3-9 months and at risk for developmental delay. The following outcomes were assessed: motor skills (Alberta Infant Motor Scale-AIMS); frequency and involvement of participation (Young Children's Participation and Environment Measure-YC-PEM), and home environment opportunities (Affordances in the Home Environment for Motor Development-AHEMD-IS). For both groups, interventions were provided by parents. The intervention for group was based on the following principles: (1) standard intervention: stimulation of motor skills; (2) STEP: stimulation of motor skills, participation, mother-infant interaction, environmental enrichment. A mean comparison test was applied to verify difference between groups after the intervention.<b>Results:</b> The protocol showed good retention and recruitment rates. The STEP group had significantly higher outcomes after intervention on the AIMS (<i>p</i> = 0.014); frequency (<i>p</i> = 0.02) and engagement (<i>p</i> = 0.03) in participation, when compared to standard intervention.<b>Conclusions:</b> The results showed that the STEP protocol is feasible, and presents better results compared to the standard intervention, which reinforces the importance of promoting participation, specific motor skills and family involvement.</p>","PeriodicalId":49138,"journal":{"name":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","volume":"43 3","pages":"303-320"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/01942638.2022.2142084","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PEDIATRICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Aims: To verify the feasibility and preliminary effects of the STEP protocol, an intervention based on specific motor skills, environmental factors and participation, in infants at biological risk.Methods: Twenty-eight at-risk infants (STEP Protocol = 14; Standard Intervention = 14), aged 3-9 months and at risk for developmental delay. The following outcomes were assessed: motor skills (Alberta Infant Motor Scale-AIMS); frequency and involvement of participation (Young Children's Participation and Environment Measure-YC-PEM), and home environment opportunities (Affordances in the Home Environment for Motor Development-AHEMD-IS). For both groups, interventions were provided by parents. The intervention for group was based on the following principles: (1) standard intervention: stimulation of motor skills; (2) STEP: stimulation of motor skills, participation, mother-infant interaction, environmental enrichment. A mean comparison test was applied to verify difference between groups after the intervention.Results: The protocol showed good retention and recruitment rates. The STEP group had significantly higher outcomes after intervention on the AIMS (p = 0.014); frequency (p = 0.02) and engagement (p = 0.03) in participation, when compared to standard intervention.Conclusions: The results showed that the STEP protocol is feasible, and presents better results compared to the standard intervention, which reinforces the importance of promoting participation, specific motor skills and family involvement.

涉及特定任务-环境-参与(STEP)方案的婴儿风险早期干预:可行性研究。
目的:验证STEP方案的可行性和初步效果,该方案是一种基于特定运动技能、环境因素和参与的干预措施,用于有生物风险的婴儿。方法:28例高危婴儿(STEP方案= 14;标准干预= 14),年龄3-9个月,有发育迟缓风险。评估了以下结果:运动技能(艾伯塔省婴儿运动量表- aims);参与的频率和参与(幼儿参与和环境测量- yc - pem)和家庭环境机会(家庭环境对运动发展的支持- ahemd - is)。对于两组,干预都是由父母提供的。实验组的干预基于以下原则:(1)标准干预:刺激运动技能;(2)步骤:运动技能刺激、参与、母婴互动、环境丰富。干预后采用均数比较检验验证组间差异。结果:该方案具有良好的保留率和招募率。STEP组干预后AIMS结果显著高于对照组(p = 0.014);与标准干预相比,参与的频率(p = 0.02)和参与度(p = 0.03)。结论:结果表明STEP方案是可行的,并且与标准干预相比效果更好,这加强了促进参与,特定运动技能和家庭参与的重要性。
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
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
4.80%
发文量
42
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: 5 issues per year Abstracted and/or indexed in: AMED; British Library Inside; Child Development Abstracts; CINAHL; Contents Pages in Education; EBSCO; Education Research Abstracts (ERA); Education Resources Information Center (ERIC); EMCARE; Excerpta Medica/EMBASE; Family and Society Studies Worldwide; Family Index Database; Google Scholar; HaPI Database; HINARI; Index Copernicus; Intute; JournalSeek; MANTIS; MEDLINE; NewJour; OCLC; OTDBASE; OT SEARCH; Otseeker; PEDro; ProQuest; PsycINFO; PSYCLINE; PubsHub; PubMed; REHABDATA; SCOPUS; SIRC; Social Work Abstracts; Speical Educational Needs Abstracts; SwetsWise; Zetoc (British Library); Science Citation Index Expanded (also known as SciSearch®); Journal Citation Reports/Science Edition; Social Sciences Citation Index®; Journal Citation Reports/ Social Sciences Edition; Current Contents®/Social and Behavioral Sciences; Current Contents®/Clinical Medicine
×
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