Ionio Chiara, Riboni Elisa, Confalonieri Emanuela, Dallatomasina Chiara, Mascheroni Eleonora, Bonanomi Andrea, Natali Sora Maria Grazia, Falautano Monica, Poloniato Antonella, Barera Graziano, Comi Giancarlo
CRIdee, Dipartimento di Psicologia, Università Cattolica, Milano, Italy.
Dipartimento di Neurologia, Servizio di Psicologia, IRCCS S. Raffaele, Milano, Italy.
Infant Behav Dev. 2016 Aug;44:199-207. doi: 10.1016/j.infbeh.2016.07.004. Epub 2016 Jul 21.
Despite the presence of many studies on difficulties related to premature birth, findings on developmental outcomes are heterogeneous. This could be explained from a biological and environmental point of view, but also from a methodological one. The aims of this study were as follows: assess cognitive and linguistic performance using the BSID-III in a population of healthy preterm infants at 24 and 36 months (corrected age); analyze whether the correction for prematurity should be applied, decide when to stop using corrected age and evaluate possible improvements between 24 and 36 months.
Developmental outcome was assessed at 24 and 36 months (corrected age) with the BSID-III in 75 healthy preterm (GA=32.5±1.97; BW=1631.55±453.92) and 69 term-born children (GA=39.77±1.00; BW=3298.95±457.27).
Preterm infants had significantly lower scores than those of term infants in Cognitive (COG) and Language (LANG REC, LANG EC) scales of the BSID-III at both 24 and 36 months, considering both corrected (CA) and chronological (UCA) age. At 24 months, significant differences between corrected and chronological scores were found for each BSID-III scale, while at 36 months, significant differences between corrected and chronological scores were found for LANG scales. Only the scores in the COG scale were statistically different between 24 and 36 months (F=4.894, P=0.009, η(2)=0.075). Considering only the preterm sample at 24 months, the differences between CA and UCA scores in the COG scale were significantly correlated to GA (p=0.000) and days in hospital (p=0.002;), while differences between CA and UCA scores in the LANG ESP scale were significantly correlated to GA (p=0.010), days in hospital (p=0.001), and birth weight (p=0.007). At 36 months, no significant correlations were found.
Preterm birth is followed by poorer cognitive and language outcomes during infancy than full-term birth. Age correction of prematurity is useful if the child is under 2 years of age; however, our findings raise concerns about the need for age correction, considering that at later ages, healthy preterm children have a higher rate of developmental delay compared with term infants. With regard to cognitive development, preterm children seem to recover from their initial disadvantage; however, with regard to linguistic development, data confirm that preterm infants are at risk for language difficulties.
尽管有许多关于早产相关困难的研究,但发育结果的研究结果存在异质性。这可以从生物学和环境角度来解释,也可以从方法论角度来解释。本研究的目的如下:使用贝利婴幼儿发展量表第三版(BSID-III)评估24个月和36个月(矫正年龄)的健康早产婴儿群体的认知和语言表现;分析是否应进行早产矫正;决定何时停止使用矫正年龄,并评估24个月至36个月之间可能的改善情况。
使用BSID-III对75名健康早产婴儿(胎龄=32.5±1.97;出生体重=1631.55±453.92)和69名足月儿(胎龄=39.77±1.00;出生体重=3298.95±457.27)在24个月和36个月(矫正年龄)时的发育结果进行评估。
在24个月和36个月时,无论考虑矫正年龄(CA)还是实际年龄(UCA),早产婴儿在BSID-III的认知(COG)和语言(语言接受、语言表达)量表上得分均显著低于足月儿。在24个月时,每个BSID-III量表的矫正分数和实际年龄分数之间存在显著差异,而在36个月时,语言量表的矫正分数和实际年龄分数之间存在显著差异。只有COG量表的分数在24个月和36个月之间存在统计学差异(F=4.894,P=0.009,η(2)=0.075)。仅考虑24个月时的早产样本,COG量表中CA和UCA分数之间的差异与胎龄(p=0.000)和住院天数(p=0.002)显著相关,而语言表达量表中CA和UCA分数之间的差异与胎龄(p=0.010)、住院天数(p=0.001)和出生体重(p=0.007)显著相关。在36个月时,未发现显著相关性。
与足月出生相比,早产婴儿在婴儿期的认知和语言结果较差。如果儿童未满2岁,早产矫正年龄是有用的;然而,我们的研究结果引发了对矫正年龄必要性的担忧,因为在较大年龄时,健康早产儿童与足月儿相比发育迟缓率更高。关于认知发展,早产儿童似乎从最初的劣势中恢复过来;然而,关于语言发展,数据证实早产婴儿有语言困难的风险。