Paper
Thursday, July 22, 2004
Preterm Motor Performance: Cohort Comparison at Age 4
Mary C. Sullivan, PhD and Margaret M. McGrath, DNSc, FAAN. College of Nursing, University of Rhode Island, Kingston, RI, USA
| Learning Objective #1: Describe perinatal group differences in motor outcomes in six dimensions in two samples of preterm infants |
| Learning Objective #2: Compare the effects of perinatal morbidity and birth weight on preschool (age 4) motor outcomes in two cohorts of preterm infants born 10 years apart |
Although advances in neonatal intensive care have increased preterm infant survival rates in the decade of the 1980s-1990s, it is unclear if poor motor outcomes will change with the decade of advances in technology. Objective: To compare oral, fine, gross, total, general motor and visual motor integration at age 4 in two preterm cohorts grouped by perinatal morbidity and born 10 years apart. Design: This is a two cohort, quasi-experimental, longitudinal study. Population, Sample, Setting, Years: Cohort 1 (N=152) was born between 1985-1989, Cohort 2 (N=155) was born between 1996-1999. Each had wide variation in birth weight and grouped as (1) preterm with medical morbidity (MPT); (2) preterm with neurological morbidity (NPT); and (3) full term (FT) comparison. Outcome Variables: Identical measures for both cohorts were general motor (MSCA motor subtest), fine motor, gross motor, oral motor, total motor (RMPI), and visual motor integration (Beery VMI). Methods: Factorial 2x3 ANOVA with cohort (Cohort 1, Cohort 2) and perinatal group (FT, MPT, NPT) were performed for the 6 motor outcome tests; birth weight was a covariate. Findings: Significant cohort effects were found for visual motor integration (Cohort 1 had higher scores than Cohort 2), oral, fine, and total motor (Cohort 2 had higher scores than Cohort 1). Perinatal group was significant for all motor outcomes. Two significant interactions were found. Conclusions: Perinatal morbidity predicts motor performance in two cohorts of prematurely born pre-school age children born a decade apart with birth weight controlled. Implications: It is essential we have a better understanding of the factors that place children at risk for sequelae, that we are better able to identify at-risk children for development, and that we understand the ways in which childrens’ development can be compromised in order to design appropriate interventions. Research supported by: NIH NINR NR03695; NICHD HD037627
Back to Health Promotion in Children
Back to 15th International Nursing Research Congress
Sigma Theta Tau International
July 22-24, 2004