Study on the evaluation and effect of early intervention flashvisual evoked potential and Bayley Scales of Infant Development Ⅱ on late premature infants

WANG Ting-xue,LI Bei,YANG Hui-lin,ZHANG Jin-ming,XU Xiu

Chinese Journal of Child Health Care ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (2) : 127-130.

PDF(549 KB)
PDF(549 KB)
Chinese Journal of Child Health Care ›› 2016, Vol. 24 ›› Issue (2) : 127-130. DOI: 10.11852/zgetbjzz2016-24-02-05
Original Articles

Study on the evaluation and effect of early intervention flashvisual evoked potential and Bayley Scales of Infant Development Ⅱ on late premature infants

  • WANG Ting-xue1,LI Bei2,YANG Hui-lin1,ZHANG Jin-ming1,XU Xiu2
Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective To assess the impact of early intervention on late preterm infants' (LPIs) early neuropsychological and visual system development,to provide clinical evidence for early intervention programs in preterm children. Methods LPIs in the intervention group(GA),LPIs in the not intervention group(GB),full-term infants (FTIs) in the control group (GC)were regular followed-up,GA were implemented of early intervention; Three groups of infants whose corrected 3 + 0.7,6±0.7,12±0.7 months of age,were assessed flashvisual evoked potential ( FVEP),Bayley Scales of Infant Development Ⅱ (BSID-Ⅱ). Results 1)FVEP assessment in the three groups showed that the mean P1 latency of GA were 165.59,131.91,102.20 at corrected ages of 3,6 and 12 months respectively;P1 mean of GA increased with age increaseing.Between GC and GA,P1 mean showed no significant difference (P>0.05) at 12 months age,description after the intervention of LPIs its visual neurodevelopment speed.2)BSID-Ⅱ assessment in the three groups showed that the mean PDI scores of GA were 89.6,94.5,102.8; the mean MDI scores of LPIs were 88.9,95.3,101.4 at corrected ages of 3,6 and 12 months respectively;the mean PDI scores of GC were 103.2,103.7,108.2; the mean MDI scores of FTIs were 100.7,104.3,106.1 at 3,6 and 12 months respectively.PDI,MDI mean of GC were maximum among three groups.MDI,PDI means of GA increased with age,P1 mean showed no significant difference (P<0.05) between GC and GA,indicating that LPIs brain psychomotor development speed after the intervention,but lower than FTIs. Conclusions Although visual development,cognitive and motor development levels of LPIs were normal,but lower than FTIs,early interventions to those can improve the cognitive and sports development.Visual development of infants younger than 1 year old is in a non-uniform level to see the development of catch-up after 6 months of age corrected.After 6 months of intervention LPIs comprehensive developmental level is higher than purely visual level of development.Proposal evaluation methods will be used in combination and can play a complementary role.

Key words

late-preterm infants / full-term infants / early intervention

Cite this article

Download Citations
WANG Ting-xue,LI Bei,YANG Hui-lin,ZHANG Jin-ming,XU Xiu. Study on the evaluation and effect of early intervention flashvisual evoked potential and Bayley Scales of Infant Development Ⅱ on late premature infants[J]. Chinese Journal of Child Health Care. 2016, 24(2): 127-130 https://doi.org/10.11852/zgetbjzz2016-24-02-05

References

[1] Spittle A,Orton J,Anderson P.Early developmental intervention programmes post-hospital discharge to prevent motor and cognitive impairments in preterm infants[J].Cochrane Database Syst Rev,2012,12:CD005495.doi:10.1002/14651858.CD005495.pub3.
[2] Subramanian SK,Gaur GS,Narayan SK.Low luminance eyes closed and monochromatic stimulations reduce variability of flash visual evoked potential latency[J].Ann Indian Acad Neurol,2013,16(4):614-618.
[3] Lee J,Birtles D,Wattam-Bell J.Orientation-reversal VEP:Comparison of phase and peak latencies in adults and infants[J].Vision Research,2012,63:50-57.
[4] Feng JJ,Wang WP,Xu X.Flash visual evoked potentials in preterm infants[J].Ophthalmology,2013,120(3):489-494.
[5] de Almeida Soares D,Cunha AB,Tudella E.Differences between late preterm and full-term infants:Comparing effects of a short bout of practice on early reaching behavior[J].Research in Developmental Disabilities,2014,35(11):3096-3107.
[6] Arpino C,Compagnone E,Montanaro ML.Preterm birth and neurodevelopmental outcome:a review[J].Childs Nerv Syst,2010,26(9):1139-1149.
[7] Romeo DM,Di Stefano A,Conversano M.Neurodevelopmental outcome at 12 and 18 months in late preterm infants[J].Eur J Paediatr Neurol,2010,14:503-507.
[8] Liu XM,Chu Q.A study on the neurological developmental outcome and associated impact factors of late preterm[J].Chinese Journal of Neonatology,2012,27(4):233-236.
[9] Kugelman A,Colin AA.Late preterm infants:near term but still in a critical developmental time period[J].Pediatrics,2013,132:741-751.
[10] Woythaler MA,McCormick MC,Smith VC.Late preterm infants have worse 24-month neurodevelopmental outcomes than term infants[J].Pediatrics.2011,127(3):e622-629.doi:10.1542/peds.2009-3598.
[11] Peykarjou S,Hoehl S,Rossion B,Pauen S.The development of visual object categorization as revealed by fast periodic visual stimulation[J].J Vis,2015,15(12):1163.
[12] Papageorgiou KA,Smith TJ,Wu R.Individual differences in infant fixation duration relate to attention and behavioral control in childhood[J].Psychol Sci,2014,25(7):1371-9.doi:10.1177/0956797614531295.
[13] 郭书娟,徐秀,夏经炜,等.早期干预对早产儿早期认知发展的影响研究,2010,18(4):295-297.
PDF(549 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/