Predictors of long-term neurodevelopmental outcomes of children born extremely preterm

Early developmental intervention programmes provided post hospital discharge to prevent motor and cognitive impairment in preterm infants

BACKGROUND

Infants born preterm are at increased risk of cognitive and motor impairments compared with infants born at term. Early developmental interventions for preterm infants are targeted at the infant or the parent-infant relationship, or both, and may focus on different aspects of early development. They aim to improve developmental outcomes for these infants, but the long-term benefits remain unclear. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2007 and updated in 2012 and 2015.

OBJECTIVES

Primary objective To assess the effect of early developmental interventions compared with standard care in prevention of motor or cognitive impairment for preterm infants in infancy (zero to < three years), preschool age (three to < five years), and school age (five to < 18 years). Secondary objective To assess the effect of early developmental interventions compared with standard care on motor or cognitive impairment for subgroups of preterm infants, including groups based on gestational age, birthweight, brain injury, timing or focus of intervention and study quality.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and trial registries in July 2023. We cross-referenced relevant literature, including identified trials and existing review articles.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Studies included randomised, quasi-randomised controlled trials (RCTs) or cluster-randomised trials of early developmental intervention programmes that began within the first 12 months of life for infants born before 37 weeks' gestational age (GA). Interventions could commence as an inpatient but had to include a post discharge component for inclusion in this review. Outcome measures were not prespecified, other than that they had to assess cognitive outcomes, motor outcomes or both. The control groups in the studies could receive standard care that would normally be provided.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Data were extracted from the included studies regarding study and participant characteristics, timing and focus of interventions and cognitive and motor outcomes. Meta-analysis using RevMan was carried out to determine the effects of early developmental interventions at each age range: infancy (zero to < three years), preschool age (three to < five years) and school age (five to < 18 years) on cognitive and motor outcomes. Subgroup analyses focused on GA, birthweight, brain injury, time of commencement of the intervention, focus of the intervention and study quality. We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane to collect data and evaluate bias. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-four studies met the inclusion criteria (5051 randomly assigned participants). There were 19 new studies identified in this update (600 participants) and a further 17 studies awaiting outcomes. Three previously included studies had new data. There was variability in the focus and intensity of the interventions, participant characteristics, and length of follow-up. All included studies were either single or multicentre trials and the number of participants varied from fewer than 20 to up to 915 in one study. The trials included in this review were mainly undertaken in middle- or high-income countries. The majority of studies commenced in the hospital, with fewer commencing once the infant was home. The focus of the intervention programmes for new included studies was increasingly targeted at both the infant and the parent-infant relationship. The intensity and dosages of interventions varied between studies, which is important when considering the applicability of any programme in a clinical setting. Meta-analysis demonstrated that early developmental intervention may improve cognitive outcomes in infancy (developmental quotient (DQ): standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.27 standard deviations (SDs), 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.15 to 0.40; P < 0.001; 25 studies; 3132 participants, low-certainty evidence), and improves cognitive outcomes at preschool age (intelligence quotient (IQ); SMD 0.39 SD, 95% CI 0.29 to 0.50; P < 0.001; 9 studies; 1524 participants, high-certainty evidence). However, early developmental intervention may not improve cognitive outcomes at school age (IQ: SMD 0.16 SD, 95% CI -0.06 to 0.38; P = 0.15; 6 studies; 1453 participants, low-certainty evidence). Heterogeneity between studies for cognitive outcomes in infancy and preschool age was moderate and at school age was substantial. Regarding motor function, meta-analysis of 23 studies showed that early developmental interventions may improve motor outcomes in infancy (motor scale DQ: SMD 0.12 SD, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.19; P = 0.003; 23 studies; 2737 participants, low-certainty evidence). At preschool age, the intervention probably did not improve motor outcomes (motor scale: SMD 0.08 SD, 95% CI -0.16 to 0.32; P = 0.53; 3 studies; 264 participants, moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence at school age for both continuous (motor scale: SMD -0.06 SD, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.18; P = 0.61; three studies; 265 participants, low-certainty evidence) and dichotomous outcome measures (low score on Movement Assessment Battery for Children (ABC) : RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.82 to 1.32; P = 0.74; 3 studies; 413 participants, low-certainty evidence) suggests that intervention may not improve motor outcome. The main source of bias was performance bias, where there was a lack of blinding of participants and personnel, which was unavoidable in this type of intervention study. Other biases in some studies included attrition bias where the outcome data were incomplete, and inadequate allocation concealment or selection bias. The GRADE assessment identified a lower certainty of evidence in the cognitive and motor outcomes at school age. Cognitive outcomes at preschool age demonstrated a high certainty due to more consistency and a larger treatment effect.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Early developmental intervention programmes for preterm infants probably improve cognitive and motor outcomes during infancy (low-certainty evidence) while, at preschool age, intervention is shown to improve cognitive outcomes (high-certainty evidence). Considerable heterogeneity exists between studies due to variations in aspects of the intervention programmes, the population and outcome measures utilised. Further research is needed to determine which types of early developmental interventions are most effective in improving cognitive and motor outcomes, and in particular to discern whether there is a longer-term benefit from these programmes.

Optimizing trajectories of social adaptive competencies after extreme prematurity during the first 1000 days

Over 75% of surviving extremely preterm infants do not have major neurodevelopmental disabilities; however, more than half face difficulties with communication, coordination, attention, learning, social, and executive function abilities. These "minor" challenges can have a negative impact on educational and social outcomes, resulting in physical, behavioral, and social health problems in adulthood. We will review assessment tools for social-emotional and adaptive functional skills in early childhood as these determine family and early childhood supports. We highlight bronchopulmonary dysplasia as an example of the critical intersections of parental wellbeing, medical and developmental adaptive trajectories in infancy and early childhood, and partnerships between child neurologists and community medical and developmental professionals. We examine studies of engaging parents to promote developmental trajectories, with a focus on supporting parent-child interactions that underlie communication, social-adaptive behaviors, and learning in the first 1000 days of life. Recommendations for neurodevelopmental surveillance and screening of extremely preterm infants can also be applied to infants with other risk factors for altered neurodevelopment.

Parental Beliefs About the Motor Development of Dutch Infants Born Very Preterm: A Cohort Study

PURPOSE

To explore the influence of preterm birth on parental beliefs about gross motor development and parents' supportive role in infants' motor development.

METHODS

Prospective cohort study: Parents of infants born very preterm (VPT) (gestation ≤32 weeks, birth weight <1500 g, without perinatal complications) and parents of healthy infants born full-term (FT) completed the Parental Beliefs on Motor Development questionnaire.

RESULTS

Questionnaires from 37 parents of infants born VPT, aged 3.5 to 7.5 months (corrected), and 110 parents of infants born FT, aged 3.5 months, were analyzed. Parents of infants born VPT believed stimulating motor development to be more important than parents of infants born FT (F = 5.22; P = .024; ηp2 = 0.035). Most parents of infants born VPT (82.4%) and FT (85.2%) acknowledged their role in supporting motor development. More parents of infants born VPT (41.2% vs 12.0%) believed they should follow their infant's natural developmental pace.

CONCLUSION

Knowledge of parental beliefs and parents' supporting role in motor development is relevant for tailoring pediatric physiotherapists' interventions with families.

Reliability of the Motor Optimality Score-Revised: A study of infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcomes

AIM

To assess the inter-assessor reliability of the Motor Optimality Score-Revised (MOS-R) when used in infants at elevated likelihood for adverse neurological outcome.

METHODS

MOS-R were assessed in three groups of infants by two assessors/cohort. Infants were recruited from longitudinal projects in Sweden (infants born extremely preterm), India (infants born in low-resource communities) and the USA (infants prenatally exposed to SARS-CoV-2). Intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) and kappa (κw) were applied. ICC of MOS-R subcategories and total scores were presented for cohorts together and separately and for age-spans: 9-12, 13-16 and 17-25-weeks post-term age.

RESULTS

252 infants were included (born extremely preterm n = 97, born in low-resource communities n = 97, prenatally SARS-CoV-2 exposed n = 58). Reliability of the total MOS-R was almost perfect (ICC: 0.98-0.99) for all cohorts, together and separately. Similar result was found for age-spans (ICC: 0.98-0.99). Substantial to perfect reliability was shown for the MOS-R subcategories (κw: 0.67-1.00), with postural patterns showing the lowest value 0.67.

CONCLUSION

The MOS-R can be used in high-risk populations with substantial to perfect reliability, both in regards of total/subcategory scores as well as in different age groups. However, the subcategory postural patterns as well as the clinical applicability of the MOS-R needs further study.

Antenatal corticosteroid administration-to-birth interval and neonatal outcomes in very preterm infants: A secondary analysis based on a prospective cohort study

INTRODUCTION

Despite the prevalent use of antenatal corticosteroids (ACS) to prevent preterm infants' adverse neonatal complications, there is currently no consensus on administration-to-birth intervals of ACS. International guidelines broadly agree that the administration of antenatal corticosteroids should be within 7 days prior to preterm birth. However, there is little evidence to support narrower optimal ACS administration-to-birth interval time. This study was undertaken to investigate the association between the administration-to-birth interval of ACS which is bounded by 48 hours and neonatal outcomes in very preterm infants.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a single-center prospective observational study. Data were collected prospectively from eligible infants from January 2008 to April 2014 at the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center, neonatal outcomes were compared between two groups based on the interval of antenatal corticosteroid administration-to-birth: the interval of <48h, and the interval of >48h. It was noted that the entire study was completed by Dongli Song et al., and uploaded the data to the DATADRYAD website. The author only used this data for secondary analysis.

RESULTS

After adjusting potential confounders (gestational age, sex, birth weight, duration of cord clamping and delivery mode), the interval of >48h group compared to the interval of <48h group had significant reductions in mortality (OR: 0.17; 95% CI: 0.05-0.59), any retinopathy of prematurity (OR: 0.36; 95% CI: 0.16-0.82), severe retinopathy of prematurity (OR: 0.07; 95% CI: 0.01-0.45), any intubation (OR: 0.39; 95% CI: 0.20-0.75) and higher 1 min Apgar (β: 0.56; 95% CI: 0.10-1.02).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that in very preterm infants, compared with the interval of ACS<48h, the interval of ACS>48 hours has a significant health promotion effect.

Modeling gross motor developmental curves of extremely and very preterm infants using the AIMS home-video method

BACKGROUND

Motor development is one of the first signals to identify whether an infant is developing well. For very preterm (VPT) infants without severe perinatal complications, little is known about their motor developmental curves.

AIMS

Explore gross motor developmental curves from 3 until 18 months corrected age (CA) of VPT infants, and related factors. Explore whether separate profiles can be distinguished and compare these to profiles of Dutch term-born infants.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective cohort study with parents repeatedly recording their infant, using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) home-video method, from 3 to 18 months CA.

SUBJECTS

Forty-two Dutch infants born ≤32.0 weeks gestational age and/or with a birthweight (BW) of <1500 g without severe perinatal complications.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Gross motor development measured with the AIMS.

RESULTS

In total 208 assessments were analyzed, with 27 infants ≥five assessments, 12 with <four, and three with one assessment. Sigmoid-shaped gross motor curves show unidirectional growth and variability. No infant or parental factors significantly influenced motor development, although a trend was seen for the model where lower BW, five-minute Apgar score <7, and Dutch native-speaking parents were associated with slower motor development. Three motor developmental profiles of VPT infants were identified, early developers, gradual developers, and late bloomers, which until 12 months CA are comparable in shape and speed to profiles of Dutch term-born infants.

CONCLUSIONS

VPT infants show great intra- and interindividual variability in gross motor development, with three motor profiles being distinguished. From 12 months CA onwards, VPT infants appear to develop at a slower pace. With some caution, classifying infants into motor developmental profiles may assist clinical decision-making.

Biomarker und Neuromonitoring zur Entwicklungsprognose nach perinataler Hirnschädigung

Das sich entwickelnde Gehirn ist in der Perinatalperiode besonders empfindlich für eine Vielzahl von Insulten, wie z. B. Extremfrühgeburtlichkeit und perinatale Asphyxie. Ihre Komplikationen können zu lebenslangen neurokognitiven, sensorischen und psychosozialen Einschränkungen führen; deren Vorhersage bleibt eine Herausforderung. Eine Schlüsselfunktion kommt der möglichst exakten Identifikation von Hirnläsionen und funktionellen Störungen zu. Die Prädiktion stützt sich auf frühe diagnostische Verfahren und die klinische Erfassung der Meilensteine der Entwicklung. Zur klinischen Diagnostik und zum Neuromonitoring in der Neonatal- und frühen Säuglingsperiode stehen bildgebende Verfahren zur Verfügung. Hierzu zählen zerebrale Sonographie, MRT am errechneten Termin, amplitudenintegriertes (a)EEG und/oder klassisches EEG, Nah-Infrarot-Spektroskopie, General Movements Assessment und die frühe klinische Nachuntersuchung z. B. mithilfe der Hammersmith Neonatal/Infant Neurological Examination. Innovative Biomarker und -muster (Omics) sowie (epi)genetische Prädispositionen sind Gegenstand wissenschaftlicher Untersuchungen. Neben der Erfassung klinischer Risiken kommt psychosozialen Faktoren im Umfeld des Kindes eine entscheidende Rolle zu. Eine möglichst akkurate Prognose ist mit hohem Aufwand verbunden, jedoch zur gezielten Beratung der Familien und der Einleitung von frühen Interventionen, insbesondere vor dem Hintergrund der hohen Plastizität des sich entwickelnden Gehirns, von großer Bedeutung. Diese Übersichtsarbeit fokussiert die Charakterisierung der oben genannten Verfahren und ihrer Kombinationsmöglichkeiten. Zudem wird ein Ausblick gegeben, wie innovative Techniken in Zukunft die Prädiktion der Entwicklung und Nachsorge dieser Kinder vereinfachen können.

Severity of Bronchopulmonary Dysplasia and Neurodevelopmental Outcome at 2 and 5 Years Corrected Age

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the association between bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD) severity and risk of neurodevelopmental impairment (NDI) at 2 years and 5 years corrected age and to examine whether this association changes over time.

STUDY DESIGN

This single-center retrospective cohort study included patients with a gestational age <30 weeks surviving to 36 weeks postmenstrual age, divided into groups according to BPD severity. NDI was defined as having cognitive or motor abilities below -1 SD, cerebral palsy, or a hearing or a visual impairment. The association was assessed using a multivariate logistic regression model analysis, adjusting for known confounders for NDI, and mixed-model analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 790 surviving infants (15% diagnosed with mild BPD, 9% with moderate BPD, and 10% with severe BPD), 88% and 82% were longitudinally assessed at 2 years and 5 years corrected age, respectively. The mixed-model analysis showed a statistically significant increase in NDI at all levels of BPD severity compared with infants with no BPD, and a 5-fold increased risk in NDI was seen from 2 years to 5 years corrected age in all degrees of BPD severity. The strength of this association between NDI and BPD severity did not change over time.

CONCLUSIONS

Increased BPD severity is associated with increased risk of NDI at both 2 years and 5 years corrected age. The absolute incidence of NDI increased significantly from 2 years to 5 years corrected age for all BPD severity categories, but this increased risk was similar at both time points in each category.