Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Development and evaluation of a follow up assessment of preterm infants at 5 years of age
  1. M J K de Kleine1,
  2. A L den Ouden2,
  3. L A A Kollée3,
  4. M W G Nijhuis- van der Sanden4,
  5. M Sondaar5,
  6. B J M van Kessel-Feddema6,
  7. S Knuijt7,
  8. A L van Baar8,
  9. A Ilsen9,
  10. R Breur-Pieterse9,
  11. J M Briët9,
  12. R Brand10,
  13. S P Verloove-Vanhorick11
  1. 1Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven, Netherlands
  2. 2TNO Prevention and Health, Leiden, Netherlands
  3. 3Department of Paediatrics, University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  4. 4Department of Child Physiotherapy, University Medical Centre Nijmegen, Netherlands
  5. 5Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  6. 6Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  7. 7Department of Neurology, University Medical Centre, Nijmegen, Netherlands
  8. 8Department of Medical Psychology, Máxima Medical Centre, Veldhoven and Department of Neonatology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  9. 9Department of Neonatology, Academic Medical Centre, Amsterdam, Netherlands
  10. 10Department of Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Netherlands
  11. 11TNO Prevention and Health, Leiden, and Professor of Child Health, Leiden University Medical Centre, Netherlands
  1. Correspondence to:
    Dr M J K de Kleine, Department of Neonatology, Máxima Medical Centre, PO Box 7777, 5500 MB Veldhoven, Netherlands;
    m.dekleine{at}pg.tno.nl

Abstract

Background: Long term follow up shows a high frequency of developmental disturbances in preterm survivors of neonatal intensive care formerly considered non-disabled.

Aims: To develop and validate an assessment tool that can help paediatricians to identify before 6 years of age which survivors have developmental disturbances that may interfere with normal education and normal life.

Methods: A total of 431 very premature infants, mean gestational age 30.2 weeks, mean birth weight 1276 g, were studied at age 5 years. Children with severe handicaps were excluded. The percentage of children with a correctly identified developmental disturbance in the domains cognition, speech and language development, neuromotor development, and behaviour were determined.

Results: The follow up instrument classified 67% as optimal and 33% as at risk or abnormal. Of the children classified as at risk or abnormal, 60% had not been identified at earlier follow up assessments. The combined set of standardised tests identified a further 30% with mild motor, cognitive, or behavioural disturbances. The paediatrician’s assessment had a specificity of 88% (95% CI 83–93%), a sensitivity of 48% (95% CI 42–58%), a positive predictive value of 85% (95% CI 78–91%), and a negative predictive value of 55% (95% CI 49–61%).

Conclusions: Even after standardised and thorough assessment, paediatricians may overlook impairments for cognitive, motor, and behavioural development. Long term follow up studies that do not include detailed standardised tests for multiple domains, especially fine motor domain, may underestimate developmental problems.

  • follow up assessment
  • preterm infant
  • motor development
  • cognitive development
  • behaviour
  • CBCL, Child Behavior CheckList
  • DDST, Denver Development Screening Test
  • ENT, ear, nose, and throat
  • NICU, neonatal intensive care units
  • TOMI, test of motor impairment
  • VLBW, very low birth weight

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Footnotes