Diagnostic yield of the neurologic assessment of the developmentally delayed child,☆☆,,★★

Presented in part at the Child Neurology Society meeting, San Francisco, Calif., October 1994.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-3476(95)70294-6Get rights and content

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the etiologic yield of the neurologic assessment of a consecutive cohort of developmentally delayed children. Study design: A retrospective chart review was carried out on all patients referred to a single university-based pediatric neurologist for evaluation of global developmental delay from July 1991 to December 1993. Patients referred because of isolated speech or motor delay or autism or those who had been previously evaluated by another neurologist were excluded. Results: A total of 77 patients were identified; 47 were male, and 62 were referred by a pediatrician. Neurologic evaluation did not confirm global delay in 10, and 8 did not complete diagnostic evaluation; one child was included in both groups. Of the remaining 60, an etiologic diagnosis was suspected by the referring physician at the time of referral in 13. Although parents suspected a delay at a mean age of 0.66 (±0.69) year, children were examined by the neurologist at a mean age of 3.58 (±2.42) years. Twenty-five were mildly delayed, 23 were moderately delayed, and 12 were severely delayed. Diagnostic studies (history, physical examination, and selected investigations, including screens for metabolic disease, karyotype, fragile X testing, electroencephalography, and neuroimaging) yielded an etiologic diagnosis in 38 (63.3%) of the 60 patients. Etiologic categories included cerebral dysgenesis (16.7%), hypoxic-ischemic encephalopathy (10.0%), chromosomal abnormalities (10%), toxins (8.3%), metabolic disorders (5.0%), and neurocutaneous (3.3%), neuromuscular (3.3%), genetic/dysmorphic (3.3%), and epileptic (3.3%) syndromes. Etiologic yield was equivalent across categories and degree of developmental delay. Conclusion: Referral to a pediatric neurologist and application of a selected battery of investigations yield etiologic findings with important implications with respect to management, prognosis, and recurrence risk estimate in a significant portion of globally delayed children. (J PEDIATR 1995;127:193-9)

Section snippets

Inclusion criteria

All children referred to a single university-based pediatric neurologist (M.I.S.) for evaluation of developmental delay between July 1, 1991, and Dec. 31, 1993, were initially identified through a review of a comprehensive, standardized computerized database (Claris Filemaker Pro C), which includes all patients seen by this neurologist since he commenced practice. The database has multiple “fields” relevant to patient identification, history (including “reason for referral” and “age at onset”),

Sample characteristics

Within the 21/2-year period, 77 children were referred to the pediatric neurologist with a primary diagnosis of developmental delay. Those subsequently excluded from analysis were those with only gross motor (n = 3) or speech delay (n = 2), with no clinical evidence of delay (n = 3), or in whom the delay had resolved by the time of the initial neurologic assessment (n = 2). Eight families elected not to complete all investigations requested, and their children were also excluded. One of the

DISCUSSION

In our consecutive cohort of children referred for evaluation of global developmental delay, an etiologic diagnosis was made in 63.3%. Previous series have been largely restricted to institutionalized cohorts of persons with severe mental retardation.6, 10, 11 Limited data exist on determination of etiologic diagnosis in persons with mild mental retardation; these studies are hampered by the assumption that sociocultural factors play the major role, thus limiting the extent of investigations

References (32)

  • CM Drillien et al.

    Predictive value of screening for difficult areas of development

    Dev Med Child Neurol

    (1988)
  • RJ Simeonsson et al.

    Developmental delays

  • JA Blackman et al.

    Impetus from public law 99-457

    Pediatrics

    (1992)
  • J McLaren et al.

    Review of recent epidemiological studies of mental retardation: prevalence, associated disorders, and etiology

    Am J Ment Retard

    (1987)
  • IIO. Akesson

    The biologic origin of mild mental retardation

    Acta Psychiatr Scand

    (1986)
  • LR First et al.

    The infant or young child with developmental delay

    N Engl J Med

    (1994)
  • Cited by (154)

    • CASK related disorder: Epilepsy and developmental outcome

      2021, European Journal of Paediatric Neurology
      Citation Excerpt :

      For the purposes of this study, we considered a developmental delay (DD) when a delay in two or more developmental areas was present (gross motor, fine motor, cognition, speech/language, personal/social, or activities of daily living) [19]. Mild DD was defined as a functional age of 66% of the chronological age, moderate DD as a functional age of 34%–66% of the chronological age, severe DD as a functional age below 33% and profound when below 25% of chronological age [20,21]. An EEG activation during sleep was considered when spikes in NREM sleep covered at least more than 25% of the sleep EEG tracing (as assessed by 2 clinical neurophysiologists) [22,23].

    • Novel truncating and missense variants extending the spectrum of EMC1-related phenotypes, causing autism spectrum disorder, severe global development delay and visual impairment

      2020, European Journal of Medical Genetics
      Citation Excerpt :

      Global development delay is a clinically and etiologically heterogeneous group of disorders that affects up to 3% of children (Shevell et al., 2003). It can be related to exogenous, metabolic or non-metabolic genetic diseases with inconstant structural brain abnormalities (Majnemer and Shevell, 1995). Making the precise diagnosis is all the more important as the prognosis and management differ between the different etiologies.

    View all citing articles on Scopus

    The authors make a good case for "working up" the young child with global developmental delay when the cause is not apparent. However, most of the recommended examinations and studies could be accomplished or ordered by a well-trained general pediatrician, and as the authors point out, cost containment is a significant concern. Perhaps consultation with a neurologist is not always needed in the evaluation of developmental delay in such children unless specific neurlogic issues need to be addressed.—J.M.G., Editor

    ☆☆

    From the School of Physical and Occupational Therapy, Departments of Neurology/Neurosurgery, Pediatrics, and Human Genetics, Montreal Children's Hospital-McGill University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada

    Reprint requests: Annette Majnemer, PhD, Montreal Children's Hospital, 2300 Tupper St., Room A-509, Montreal, Quebec H3H 1P3, Canada.

    ★★

    0022-3476/95/$3.00 + 0 9/20/64849

    View full text