Advertisement

Subjective and Objective Assessment of Developmental Dysfunction in Children Aged 0–3 Years – Comparative Study

Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 1011)

Abstract

The development of a child is characterized by the serial changes as a result of which an adult organism is formed. There are many factors that could disrupt this process, so it is important to detect them as early as possible and focus on appropriate treatment and therapy. For this purpose, early and comprehensive diagnostics are necessary. Depending on the age of the child and the purpose of the physiotherapeutic examination, (1) methods based on a subjective feeling supported by knowledge and experience of a physiotherapist or doctor, and (2) objectified tests using measuring tools are used to assess the correctness of development. The aim of the work was (1) to compare the subjective efficacy (and thus those with a greater diagnostic error) and objective methods, and (2) to demonstrate the need to search for new diagnostic tools to estimate the measurable developmental deficits in young children from 0 to 3 years old. Diagnostic methods used during the assessment of the child’s development level and the level of its developmental disorders are presented in the tables, and in the place where it was possible, the value of the estimator of the method’s efficiency was given. The methods and scales of the child’s psychomotor development assessment listed in the tables clearly show that subjective tools are much more than objective methods, and their effectiveness expressed in reliability ranges from 0.76–0.98. The separate and combined use of the measuring methods are evaluated in this article.

Keywords

Infant Child Physically disabled Therapy Cerebral palsy Development 

References

  1. 1.
    Wolański, N., Siniarska, A. (eds.): Biomedyczne podstawy rozwoju i wychowania. Państwowe Wydawnictwo Naukowe (1979)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gajewska, E.: Narzędzia diagnostyczne do oceny wczesnego rozwoju motorycznego stosowane w fizjoterapii dziecięcej. Neurologia Dziecięca 20(40), 53–58 (2011)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Panjan, A., Sarabon, N.: Review of methods for the evaluation of human body balance. Sport Sci. Rev. 19(5–6), 131–163 (2010)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kaplan, R.M., Saccuzzo, D.P.: Psychological Testing: Principles, Applications, and Issues. Nelson Education (2017)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Shahshahani, S., Vameghi, R., Azari, N., Sajedi, F., Kazemnejad, A.: Validity and reliability determination of Denver developmental screening test-II in 0–6 year-olds in Tehran. Iran. J. Pediatr. 20(3), 313 (2010)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fagard, J., Wolff, P.H. (eds.): The Development of Timing Control and Temporal Organization in Coordinated Action: Invariant Relative Timing, Rhythms and Coordination, vol. 81. Elsevier (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Novak, I., Morgan, C., Adde, L., Blackman, J., Boyd, R.N., Brunstrom-Hernandez, J., De Vries, L.S.: Early, accurate diagnosis and early intervention in cerebral palsy: advances in diagnosis and treatment. JAMA Pediatr. 171(9), 897–907 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Dubowitz, L., Ricciw, D., Mercuri, E.: The Dubowitz neurological examination of the full-term newborn. Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev. 11(1), 52–60 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kolobe, T.H., Bulanda, M., Susman, L.: Predicting motor outcome at preschool age for infants tested at 7, 30, 60, and 90 days after term age using the Test of Infant Motor Performance. Phys. Ther. 84(12), 1144–1156 (2004)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Montgomery, C., Johansen, K., Lucas, S., Strömberg, B., Persson, K.: The Structured Observation of Motor Performance in Infants can detect cerebral palsy early in neonatal intensive care recipients. Early Hum. Dev. 113, 31–39 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Bartlett, D.J., Fanning, J.K., Miller, L., Conti-Becker, A., Doralp, S.: Development of the daily activities of infants scale: a measure supporting early motor development. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 50(8), 613–617 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Harris, S.R., Daniels, L.E.: Reliability and validity of the Harris Infant Neuromotor Test. J. Pediatr. 139(2), 249–253 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Nickel, R.E., Renke, C.A., Gallenstein, J.S.: The infant motor screen. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 31(1), 35–42 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Stuberg, W.A., White, P.J., Miedaner, J.A., Dehne, P.R.: Item reliability of the Milani-Comparetti motor development screening test. Phys. Ther. 69(5), 328–335 (1989)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Maring, J.R., Elbaum, L.: Concurrent validity of the early intervention developmental profile and the peabody developmental motor scale-2. Pediatr. Phys. Ther. 19(2), 116–120 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Mockeviciene, D., Mililiuniene, L.: Changes of infantsmotor development using corrective education. Soc. Welf. Interdiscip. Approach 2(1), 115–123 (2011)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Soleimani, F., Azari, N., Vameghi, R., Sajedi, F., Shahshahani, S., Karimi, H., Gharib, M.: Is the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Developmental Screening Test, valid and reliable for Persian speaking children? Iran. J. Pediatr. 26(5) (2016)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Van Hartingsveldt, M.J., Cup, E.H., Oostendorp, R.A.: Reliability and validity of the fine motor scale of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales-2. Occup. Ther. Int. 12(1), 1–13 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Tecklin, J.S. (ed.): Pediatric Physical Therapy. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Gajewska, E., Sobieska, M., Samborski, W.: Correlates between Munich Functional Development Diagnostics and postural reactivity findings based on seven provovoked postural reactions modus Vojta during the first period of child’s life. Annales Academiae Medicae Stetinensis 52(3), 67–70 (2006)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kwong, A.K., Fitzgerald, T.L., Doyle, L.W., Cheong, J.L., Spittle, A.J.: Predictive validity of spontaneous early infant movement for later cerebral palsy: a systematic review. Dev. Med. Child Neurol. 60(5), 480–489 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Hadders-Algra, M.: Early brain damage and the development of motor behavior in children: clues for therapeutic intervention? Neural Plast. 8(1–2), 31–49 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Snyder, P., Eason, J.M., Philibert, D., Ridgway, A., McCaughey, T.: Concurrent validity and reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale in infants at dual risk for motor delays. Phys. Occup. Ther. Pediatr. 28(3), 267–282 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Connolly, B.H., Dalton, L., Smith, J.B., Lamberth, N.G., McCay, B., Murphy, W.: Concurrent validity of the bayley scales of infant development II (BSID-II) motor scale and the peabody developmental motor scale II (PDMS-2) in 12-month-old infants. Pediatr. Phys. Ther. 18(3), 190–196 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Hoskens, J., Klingels, K., Smits-Engelsman, B.: Validity and cross-cultural differences of the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development, in typically developing infants. Early Hum. Dev. 125, 17–25 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Fuentefria, R.D.N., Silveira, R.C., Procianoy, R.S.: Motor development of preterm infants assessed by the Alberta Infant Motor Scale: systematic review article. Jornal de pediatria 93(4), 328–342 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Adamska, M., Wójtowicz, D., Ostrowska, B.: Ocena pozycji siedzącej u niemowląt w wieku 9 miesięcy przy użyciu stanowiska podoskopowego PodoBaby. Acta Bio-Optica et Informatica Medica. Inżynieria Biomedyczna 19(1) (2013)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Specialist Center of PhysiotherapyRybnikPoland
  2. 2.Pediatric Outpatient Clinic Med–MaxPhysiotherapy Service in WarsawWarszawaPoland
  3. 3.Department of PhysiotherapyThe Jerzy Kukuczka Academy of Physical Education in KatowiceKatowicePoland
  4. 4.Institute of AnthropologyWroclaw University of Environmental and Life SciencesWrocławPoland

Personalised recommendations