Background Only a few studies have been conducted in order to create norms of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) for the assessment of gross motor development of preterm (PT) infants; AIMS performance of PT infants was compared with that of the Canadian norms of full-term (FT) infants, but not with FT infants of the same nationality. Moreover, the possible impact of prematurity-related morbidity factors on AIMS performance is unknown. Objectives To evaluate AIMS trajectory in a large population of Greek PT infants and create norms; to compare it with AIMS trajectory of Greek FT infants; and to examine the possible influence of neonatal morbidity on AIMS scores in the PT sample. Design Cross-sectional study Methods Mean AIMS scores were compared, per month (1-19), between 403 PT infants (≤32 weeks) at corrected for prematurity age and 1038 FT infants. In PT infants, association of AIMS scores with respiratory distress syndrome (RDS), intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) of grade ≤III, bronchopulmonary dysplasia (BPD), retinopathy of prematurity (ROP) and sepsis was assessed by hierarchical regression analysis. Results AIMS scores were significantly lower in PT than FT infants (p<0.0001). Mean AIMS scores in PT infants were significantly associated with RDS (b=-1.93; 95% CI: -2.70, -1.16), IVH (b=-0.97; 95% CI: -1.69, -0.25), ROP (b=-1.12; 95% CI: - 1.99, -0.24), but not with BPD or sepsis in hierarchical regression analysis. Conclusions AIMS norms were created for Greek PT infants. This study confirms that AIMS trajectories of PT infants are below those of FT infants of the same nationality. The influence of morbidity factors including RDS, IVH and ROP should be taken into account when performing AIMS in PT infants.

Assessment of upper limb function, kinematic analysis, and dystonia in patients with spastic diplegia cerebral palsy and periventricular leukomalacia. Seven children with spastic diplegia cerebral palsy and 8 controls underwent upper limb kinematics. Movement duration, average and maximum linear velocity, index of curvature, index of dystonia, and target accuracy and stability were analyzed. In the patients with spastic diplegia, Gross Motor Function and Manual Ability Classification Systems were determined, and spasticity and dystonia were rated using the Modified Ashworth and the Burke-Fahn-Marsden Dystonia scales respectively. Children with spastic diplegia demonstrated a tendency toward higher index of dystonia reflecting overflow, higher index of curvature, lower velocities, and poor target accuracy and stability. All patients showed clinical evidence of dystonia in the upper limbs. Dystonia scores correlated with the Manual Ability Classification System (r = 0.86, P = .01) and with the index of dystonia (r = 0.82, P = .02). Children with spastic diplegia cerebral palsy present dystonia in the upper limbs. This is functionally relevant and can be measured with kinematic analysis.

Early-term birth (37⁺⁰ to 38⁺⁶ gestational weeks) may have a negative impact on infants’ neurodevelopment compared to delivery at 39 weeks or beyond. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the gross motor development of early-term infants using the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS). A total of 1087 healthy infants (559 early-term and 528 full-term infants born at 39⁺⁰ to 41⁺⁶ weeks of gestation) were studied. Mean AIMS scores were compared between the two groups at monthly intervals. The impact of gestational age on total AIMS scores was assessed by linear regression, after adjustment for chronological age, sex and SGA. Mean total AIMS scores, albeit within normal range, were significantly lower in early-term than full-term infants at the 2nd, 6th, 7th, 8th and 12th month of age; differences between groups were within three points. In multivariate regression analysis, a longer gestation by one week had a positive impact on total AIMS score during the first year of life (β = 0.90; 95% CI 0.45, 1.35). In conclusion, early-term infants exhibit worse gross motor performance during the first year of life in comparison with their full-term peers; however, the differences between the two groups are small.