Can Alberta infant motor scale and milani comparetti motor development screening test be rapid alternatives to bayley scales of infant development-II at high-risk infants

• Main Authors: Zeynep Hosbay Yildirim, Nur Aydinli, Baris Ekici, Burak Tatli, Mine Çaliskan
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Wolters Kluwer Medknow Publications 2012-01-01
• Series: Annals of Indian Academy of Neurology
• Subjects: Alberta infant motor scale; bayley scales of infant development-II; high-risk infant; milani comparetti motor development screening test
• Online Access: http://www.annalsofian.org/article.asp?issn=0972-2327;year=2012;volume=15;issue=3;spage=196;epage=199;aulast=Yildirim
• ISSN: 0972-2327; 1998-3549

Purpose: The main object of the present study is to assess neuromotor development of high-risk infants by using three tests, and to determine inter-test concordance and the feasibility of these tests. Materials and Methods: One-hundred and nine patients aged between 0 and 6 months and identified as "high-risk infant" according to the Kliegman′s criteria were enrolled to the study. Three different tests were used to assess neuromotor development of the patients: Bayley scales of infant development-II (BSID-II), Alberta infant motor scale (AIMS), and Milani Comparetti Motor Development Screening Test (MCMDST). Results: Correlation analysis was performed between pure scores of BSID-II motor scale and total scores of AIMS. These two tests were highly correlated (r:0.92). Moderate concordance was found between BSID-II and AIMS (k:0.35). Slight concordance was found between BSID-II and MCMDST; and the concordance was slight again for AIMS and MCMDST (k:0.11 and k:0.16, respectively) too. Conclusion: AIMS has a high correlation and consistency with BSID-II and can be used with routine neurological examination as it is based on observations, has few items, and requires less time to complete.