Department of Physical Therapy, Universidade do Estado de Santa Catarina, Florianópolis, SC, Brazil.
Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. 2022;42(6):635-644. doi: 10.1080/01942638.2022.2073798. Epub 2022 May 10.
To verify if there is a difference between the percentile ranks for Brazilian infants compared with norms for Canadian infants on the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). A cross-sectional study in which 322 Brazilian infants, 2 to 15 months old, were administered the AIMS. Percentile ranks were calculated using norms for Canadian infants and norms from two studies of Brazilian infants. The Friedman test compared the AIMS percentile ranks for the entire sample. For reliability analysis, the interclass correlation coefficient (ICC) was used. Bland Altman's analysis was applied to compare percentile ranks. Of the 322 evaluations analyzed, there were significant differences (p<.001) between the three percentile ranks compared. The Canadian norms presented the lowest average rating. There was good reliability between the percentile ranks (ICC > 0.75) but low agreement (Bland Altman; p<.001). There are differences between the Brazilian and Canadian percentile ranks and between the Brazilian percentile ranks of 2014 and 2016, and these differences may influence identification of motor development.
为了验证巴西婴儿的百分等级与加拿大婴儿的 Alberta 婴儿运动量表 (AIMS) 标准之间是否存在差异。 一项横断面研究中,对 322 名 2 至 15 个月大的巴西婴儿进行了 AIMS 测试。百分等级是使用加拿大婴儿的标准和两项巴西婴儿研究的标准计算得出的。弗里德曼检验比较了整个样本的 AIMS 百分等级。为了进行可靠性分析,使用了组内相关系数 (ICC)。 Bland Altman 分析用于比较百分等级。 在分析的 322 项评估中,三个百分等级之间存在显著差异(p<.001)。加拿大标准呈现出最低的平均评分。百分等级之间具有良好的可靠性(ICC > 0.75),但一致性较低(Bland Altman;p<.001)。 巴西和加拿大的百分等级之间存在差异,2014 年和 2016 年的巴西百分等级之间也存在差异,这些差异可能会影响运动发育的识别。