{"title":"早期大肌肉运动发展:AIMS和BSID-III之间的协议。","authors":"Marlette Burger, Esme R Jordaan, Dana Niehaus","doi":"10.4102/sajp.v81i1.2168","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early gross motor development is a crucial indicator of overall neurodevelopment. In low- and middle-income countries, lack of accessible assessment tools poses challenges for healthcare professionals evaluating infant neurodevelopment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the agreement between the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III (BSID-III) gross motor domain at 6 months and to evaluate the predictive validity of the AIMS at 6 months for identifying severe gross motor delays at 18 months.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This nested subgroup study assessed 112 full-term infants using both AIMS and BSID-III at 6 months and BSID-III at 18 months. Agreement between measures was determined using Bland-Altman plots, while predictive validity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with various cut-off scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bland-Altman analysis showed strong agreement between AIMS and BSID-III in the lower-performance range, with bias only in scores above 33. The traditional 10th percentile AIMS cut-off had low sensitivity (27.3%) but high specificity (98%) for predicting delays at 18 months. A modified 23rd percentile cut-off improved sensitivity to 63.6% while maintaining acceptable specificity (81.6%), with a 95.2% negative predictive value (NPV).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AIMS demonstrates strong agreement with BSID-III when identifying potential developmental delays. The proposed 23rd percentile cut-off offers a more balanced screening threshold for this population.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The AIMS presents a viable alternative to the BSID-III for initial screening in resource-limited settings. The high NPV at the 23rd percentile cut-off makes it useful for ruling out developmental delays.</p>","PeriodicalId":44180,"journal":{"name":"South African Journal of Physiotherapy","volume":"81 1","pages":"2168"},"PeriodicalIF":1.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12135733/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Early gross motor development: Agreement between the AIMS and the BSID-III.\",\"authors\":\"Marlette Burger, Esme R Jordaan, Dana Niehaus\",\"doi\":\"10.4102/sajp.v81i1.2168\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Early gross motor development is a crucial indicator of overall neurodevelopment. In low- and middle-income countries, lack of accessible assessment tools poses challenges for healthcare professionals evaluating infant neurodevelopment.</p><p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To determine the agreement between the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III (BSID-III) gross motor domain at 6 months and to evaluate the predictive validity of the AIMS at 6 months for identifying severe gross motor delays at 18 months.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>This nested subgroup study assessed 112 full-term infants using both AIMS and BSID-III at 6 months and BSID-III at 18 months. Agreement between measures was determined using Bland-Altman plots, while predictive validity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with various cut-off scores.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Bland-Altman analysis showed strong agreement between AIMS and BSID-III in the lower-performance range, with bias only in scores above 33. The traditional 10th percentile AIMS cut-off had low sensitivity (27.3%) but high specificity (98%) for predicting delays at 18 months. A modified 23rd percentile cut-off improved sensitivity to 63.6% while maintaining acceptable specificity (81.6%), with a 95.2% negative predictive value (NPV).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The AIMS demonstrates strong agreement with BSID-III when identifying potential developmental delays. The proposed 23rd percentile cut-off offers a more balanced screening threshold for this population.</p><p><strong>Clinical implications: </strong>The AIMS presents a viable alternative to the BSID-III for initial screening in resource-limited settings. The high NPV at the 23rd percentile cut-off makes it useful for ruling out developmental delays.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":44180,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"South African Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"volume\":\"81 1\",\"pages\":\"2168\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12135733/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"South African Journal of Physiotherapy\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v81i1.2168\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"South African Journal of Physiotherapy","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4102/sajp.v81i1.2168","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:早期大肌肉运动发育是整体神经发育的重要指标。在低收入和中等收入国家,缺乏可获得的评估工具给评估婴儿神经发育的卫生保健专业人员带来了挑战。目的:确定阿尔伯塔婴儿运动量表(AIMS)和Bayley婴儿发育量表- iii (BSID-III)大运动领域在6个月时的一致性,并评估6个月时AIMS对18个月时严重大运动迟缓的预测有效性。方法:这项嵌套亚组研究评估了112名足月婴儿,在6个月时使用AIMS和BSID-III,在18个月时使用BSID-III。测量之间的一致性采用Bland-Altman图确定,而预测效度采用具有不同截止分数的受试者工作特征(ROC)曲线评估。结果:Bland-Altman分析显示AIMS和BSID-III在较低表现范围内具有很强的一致性,仅在得分高于33分时存在偏倚。传统的第10百分位AIMS截止值在预测18个月的延迟方面敏感性低(27.3%),但特异性高(98%)。改良的23百分位截止值将敏感性提高到63.6%,同时保持可接受的特异性(81.6%),阴性预测值(NPV)为95.2%。结论:AIMS在识别潜在的发育迟缓方面与BSID-III有很强的一致性。建议的23个百分位临界值为这一人群提供了一个更平衡的筛查阈值。临床意义:AIMS提供了一个可行的替代BSID-III在资源有限的情况下进行初始筛查。在第23个百分位截止点的高净现值有助于排除发育迟缓。
Early gross motor development: Agreement between the AIMS and the BSID-III.
Background: Early gross motor development is a crucial indicator of overall neurodevelopment. In low- and middle-income countries, lack of accessible assessment tools poses challenges for healthcare professionals evaluating infant neurodevelopment.
Objectives: To determine the agreement between the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) and Bayley Scales of Infant Development-III (BSID-III) gross motor domain at 6 months and to evaluate the predictive validity of the AIMS at 6 months for identifying severe gross motor delays at 18 months.
Method: This nested subgroup study assessed 112 full-term infants using both AIMS and BSID-III at 6 months and BSID-III at 18 months. Agreement between measures was determined using Bland-Altman plots, while predictive validity was evaluated using receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves with various cut-off scores.
Results: Bland-Altman analysis showed strong agreement between AIMS and BSID-III in the lower-performance range, with bias only in scores above 33. The traditional 10th percentile AIMS cut-off had low sensitivity (27.3%) but high specificity (98%) for predicting delays at 18 months. A modified 23rd percentile cut-off improved sensitivity to 63.6% while maintaining acceptable specificity (81.6%), with a 95.2% negative predictive value (NPV).
Conclusion: The AIMS demonstrates strong agreement with BSID-III when identifying potential developmental delays. The proposed 23rd percentile cut-off offers a more balanced screening threshold for this population.
Clinical implications: The AIMS presents a viable alternative to the BSID-III for initial screening in resource-limited settings. The high NPV at the 23rd percentile cut-off makes it useful for ruling out developmental delays.