What assessments evaluate use of hands in infants? A literature review

The aim of this study was to describe systematically the best available intervention evidence for children with cerebral palsy (CP). This study was a systematic review of systematic reviews. The following databases were searched: CINAHL, Cochrane Library, DARE, EMBASE, Google Scholar MEDLINE, OTSeeker, PEDro, PsycBITE, PsycINFO, and speechBITE. Two independent reviewers determined whether studies met the inclusion criteria. These were that (1) the study was a systematic review or the next best available; (2) it was a medical/allied health intervention; and (3) that more than 25% of participants were children with CP. Interventions were coded using the Oxford Levels of Evidence; GRADE; Evidence Alert Traffic Light; and the International Classification of Function, Disability and Health. Overall, 166 articles met the inclusion criteria (74% systematic reviews) across 64 discrete interventions seeking 131 outcomes. Of the outcomes assessed, 16% (21 out of 131) were graded 'do it' (green go); 58% (76 out of 131) 'probably do it' (yellow measure); 20% (26 out of 131) 'probably do not do it' (yellow measure); and 6% (8 out of 131) 'do not do it' (red stop). Green interventions included anticonvulsants, bimanual training, botulinum toxin, bisphosphonates, casting, constraint-induced movement therapy, context-focused therapy, diazepam, fitness training, goal-directed training, hip surveillance, home programmes, occupational therapy after botulinum toxin, pressure care, and selective dorsal rhizotomy. Most (70%) evidence for intervention was lower level (yellow) while 6% was ineffective (red). Evidence supports 15 green light interventions. All yellow light interventions should be accompanied by a sensitive outcome measure to monitor progress and red light interventions should be discontinued since alternatives exist. © 2013 Mac Keith Press.

This systematic review evaluates assessments used to discriminate, predict, or evaluate the motor development of preterm infants during the first year of life. Eighteen assessments were identified; nine met the inclusion criteria. The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS), Bayley Scale of Infant and Toddler Development -- Version III, Peabody Developmental Motor Scales -- Version 2, Test of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP), and Toddler and Infant Motor Examination have good discriminative validity when examined in large populations. The AIMS, Prechtl's Assessment of General Movements (GMs), Neuro Sensory Motor Development Assessment (NSMDA), and TIMP were designed for preterm infants and are able to detect more subtle changes in movement quality. The best predictive assessment tools are age dependent: GMs, the Movement Assessment of Infants, and TIMP are strongest in early infancy (age 4 mo or less) and the AIMS and NSMDA are better at older ages (8-12 mo). The TIMP is the only tool that has demonstrated a difference between groups in response to intervention in two randomized controlled trials. The AIMS, TIMP, and GMs demonstrated the highest levels of overall reliability (interrater and intrarater intraclass correlation coefficient or kappa>0.85). Selection of motor assessment tools during the first year of life for infants born preterm will depend on the intended purpose of their use for discrimination, prediction, and/or evaluation.

Modifications made to the Kilifi Developmental Checklist and the psychometric characteristics of the new measure (The Kilifi Developmental Inventory) which assess the psychomotor functioning of children aged 6-35 months are described. Two groups of community children (319 rural and 104 urban dwellers) and nine children with neurodevelopmental disorders were recruited for a cross-sectional study. In both a rural and urban reference population, the inventory showed excellent internal consistency, interobserver agreement, test-retest reliability and sensitivity to maturational changes. Children with neurodevelopmental impairment and those who were underweight had significantly lower scores than the community sample, attesting to the sensitivity of the measure. Mothers found the assessment procedures acceptable and informative. The Kilifi Developmental Inventory is a culturally appropriate measure that can be used to monitor and describe the development of at-risk children in resource-limited settings in Kenya.