Hille E T, den Ouden A L, Saigal S, Wolke D, Lambert M, Whitaker A, Pinto-Martin J A, Hoult L, Meyer R, Feldman J F, Verloove-Vanhorick S P, Paneth N
TNO Prevention and Health, Child Health Division, PO Box 2215, 2301 CE, Leiden, Netherlands.
Lancet. 2001 May 26;357(9269):1641-3. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04818-2.
The increased survival chances of extremely low-birthweight (ELBW) infants (weighing <1000 g at birth) has led to concern about their behavioural outcome in childhood. In reports from several countries with different assessments at various ages, investigators have noted a higher frequency of behavioural problems in such infants, but cross-cultural comparisons are lacking. Our aim was to compare behavioural problems in ELBW children of similar ages from four countries.
We prospectively studied 408 ELBW children aged 8-10 years, whose parents completed the child behaviour checklist. The children came from the Netherlands, Germany, Canada, and USA. The checklist provides a total problem score consisting of eight narrow-band scales. Of these, two (aggressive and delinquent behaviour) give a broad-band externalising score, three (anxious, somatic, and withdrawn behaviour) give a broad-band internalising score, and three (social, thought, and attention problems) indicate difficulties fitting neither broad-band dimension. For each cohort we analysed scores in ELBW children and those in normal- birthweight controls (two cohorts) or national normative controls (two cohorts). Across countries, we assessed deviations of the ELBW children from normative or control groups.
ELBW children had higher total problem scores than normative or control children, but this increase was only significant in European countries. Narrow-band scores were raised only for the social, thought, and attention difficulty scales, which were 0.5-1.2 SD higher in ELBW children than in others. Except for the increase in internalising scores recorded for one cohort, ELBW children did not differ from normative or control children on internalising or externalising scales.
Despite cultural differences, types of behavioural problems seen in ELBW children were very similar in the four countries. This finding suggests that biological mechanisms contribute to behavioural problems of ELBW children.
极低出生体重(ELBW)婴儿(出生体重<1000克)存活几率的增加引发了人们对其童年行为结果的关注。在几个国家不同年龄阶段进行不同评估的报告中,研究人员注意到这类婴儿出现行为问题的频率较高,但缺乏跨文化比较。我们的目的是比较来自四个国家的同龄ELBW儿童的行为问题。
我们对408名8至10岁的ELBW儿童进行了前瞻性研究,这些儿童的父母完成了儿童行为清单。这些儿童来自荷兰、德国、加拿大和美国。该清单提供了一个由八个窄带量表组成的总问题得分。其中,两个量表(攻击性行为和违法行为)给出一个宽带外化得分,三个量表(焦虑、躯体和退缩行为)给出一个宽带内化得分,三个量表(社交、思维和注意力问题)表明不属于这两个宽带维度的困难。对于每个队列,我们分析了ELBW儿童以及正常出生体重对照组(两个队列)或国家常模对照组(两个队列)的得分。在不同国家之间,我们评估了ELBW儿童与常模或对照组的偏差。
ELBW儿童的总问题得分高于常模或对照儿童,但这种增加仅在欧洲国家显著。窄带得分仅在社交、思维和注意力困难量表上有所提高,ELBW儿童的这些量表得分比其他儿童高0.5 - 1.2个标准差。除了一个队列记录的内化得分增加外,ELBW儿童在内化或外化量表上与常模或对照儿童没有差异。
尽管存在文化差异,但四个国家中ELBW儿童出现的行为问题类型非常相似。这一发现表明生物机制导致了ELBW儿童的行为问题。