Pediatric physical therapy in infancy: from nightmare to dream? A two-arm randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Systematic reviews have suggested that early intervention by means of specific motor training programs and general developmental programs in which parents learn how to promote infant development may be the most promising ways to promote infant motor and cognitive development of infants with or at high risk for developmental motor disorders. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to investigate the effects of a recently developed pediatric physical therapy intervention program ("Coping With and Caring for Infants With Special Needs" [COPCA]) on the development of infants at high risk for developmental disorders using a combined approach of a 2-arm randomized trial and process evaluation. SETTING: The study was conducted at the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS AND INTERVENTION: Forty-six infants at high risk for developmental disorders were randomly assigned to receive COPCA (a family-centered program) (n=21) or traditional infant physical therapy (TIP) (n=25) between 3 to 6 months corrected age (CA). Developmental outcome was assessed by blinded assessors at 3, 6, and 18 months CA with a neurological examination, the Alberta Infant Motor Scales, the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory, and the Mental Developmental Index (MDI) of the Bayley Scales of Infant Development. Contents of the intervention were analyzed by a quantitative video analysis of therapy sessions. Quantified physical therapy actions were correlated to evaluate associations between intervention and developmental outcome components. RESULTS: The trial revealed that developmental outcome in both groups was largely identical. Process evaluation showed that typical COPCA actions-(1) family involvement and educational actions, (2) application of a wide variation in challenging the infant to produce motor behavior by himself or herself and allowing the infant to continue this activity, and (3) stimulation of motor behavior at the limit of the infant's capabilities-had positive correlations with developmental outcome at 18 months CA. The use of handling techniques was negatively associated with the Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory outcome at 18 months CA. LIMITATIONS: Major limitations were the limited size of the groups studied and the differences between the groups in frequency and duration of physical therapy sessions. CONCLUSION: Extending the randomized trial with process evaluation was needed to obtain insight into associations between the components of intervention and developmental outcome. Specific therapist behaviors of parent coaching are associated with improved developmental outcome measures. Further studies are needed to examine whether these associations are caused by therapist behavior or whether therapist behavior is modified by children's motor skills.

Differences between the family-centered "COPCA" program and traditional infant physical therapy based on neurodevelopmental treatment principles.

BACKGROUND: Evidence for effectiveness of pediatric physical therapy in infants at high risk for developmental motor disorders is limited. Therefore, "Coping With and Caring for Infants With Special Needs" (COPCA), a family-centered, early intervention program, was developed. The COPCA program is based on 2 components: (1) family involvement and educational parenting and (2) the neuromotor principles of the neuronal group selection theory. The COPCA coach uses principles of coaching to encourage the family's own capacities for solving problems of daily care and incorporating variation, along with trial and error in daily activities. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate whether the content of sessions of the home-based, early intervention COPCA program differs from that of traditional infant physical therapy (TIP) sessions, which in the Netherlands are largely based on neurodevelopmental treatment. SETTING: The study was conducted at the University Medical Center Groningen in the Netherlands. DESIGN: A quantitative video analysis of therapy sessions was conducted with infants participating in a 2-arm randomized trial. PATIENTS AND INTERVENTION: Forty-six infants at high risk for developmental motor disorders were randomly assigned to receive COPCA (n=21) or TIP (n=25) between 3 and 6 months corrected age. Intervention sessions were videotaped at 4 and 6 months corrected age and analyzed with a standardized observation protocol for the classification of physical therapy actions. Outcome parameters were relative amounts of time spent on specific physical therapy actions. RESULTS: The content of COPCA and TIP differed substantially. For instance, in TIP sessions, more time was spent on facilitation techniques, including handling, than in COPCA sessions (29% versus 3%, respectively). During COPCA, more time was spent on family coaching and education than during TIP (16% versus 4%, respectively). LIMITATIONS: The major limitation of the study was its restriction to the Netherlands, implying that findings cannot be generalized automatically to other countries. CONCLUSION: The COPCA program differs broadly from TIP as applied in the Netherlands. Studies on the effectiveness of this family-centered program are needed.

Does physiotherapeutic intervention affect motor outcome in high-risk infants? An approach combining a randomized controlled trial and process evaluation.

AIM: The aim of this study was to examine the effects of intervention in infants at risk of developmental disorders on motor outcome, as measured by the Infant Motor Profile (IMP) and using the combined approach of a randomized controlled trial and process evaluation. METHOD: At a corrected age of 3 months, 46 infants (20 males, 26 females) recruited from the neonatal intensive care unit at the University Medical Centre Groningen (median birthweight 1210 g, range 585-4750 g; median gestational age 30 wks, range 25-40 wks) were included on the basis of definitely abnormal general movements. Exclusion criteria were severe congenital disorders and insufficient understanding of the Dutch language. The infants were assigned to either the family-centred COPing with and CAring for Infants with Special Needs (COPCA) intervention group (n=21; 9 males, 12 females) or the traditional infant physiotherapy (TIP) intervention group (n=25; 11 males, 14 females) for a period of 3 months. Three infants assigned to the TIP group (one male, two females) did not receive physiotherapy. IMP scores were measured by blinded assessors at 3, 4, 5, 6, and 18 months. At each age, the infants were neurologically examined. Physiotherapeutic sessions at 4 and 6 months were videotaped. Quantified physiotherapeutic actions were correlated with IMP scores at 6 and 18 months. RESULTS: The IMP scores of both the COPCA and TIP groups before, during, and after the intervention did not differ. Some physiotherapeutic actions were associated with IMP outcomes; the associations differed for infants who developed cerebral palsy (n=10) and those who did not (n=33). INTERPRETATION: At randomized controlled trial level, the scores of both the TIP and COPCA groups did not differ in effect on motor outcome, as measured with the IMP. The analysis of physiotherapeutic actions revealed associations between these actions and IMP outcomes. However, the small sample size of this study precludes pertinent conclusions.

Development of a quantitative tool to assess the content of physical therapy for infants.

PURPOSE: The study aim was to describe and quantify physical therapy interventions for infants at high risk for developmental disorders. METHODS: An observation protocol was developed based on knowledge about infant physical therapy and analysis of directly observable physiotherapeutic (PT) actions. The protocol's psychometric quality was assessed. Videos of 42 infant physical therapy sessions at 4 or 6 months of corrected age were analyzed. RESULTS: The observation protocol classified PT actions into 8 mutually exclusive categories. Virtually all PT actions during treatment could be classified. Inter- and intrarater agreements were satisfactory (intraclass correlations, 0.68-1.00). Approximately 40% of treatment time was spent challenging the infant to produce motor behavior by themselves, whereas approximately 30% of time facilitation techniques were applied. Tradition-based sessions could be differentiated from function-oriented ones. CONCLUSIONS: It is possible to document PT actions during physical therapy treatment of infants at high risk for cerebral palsy in a systematic, standardized, and reliable way.

Development of postural control in typically developing children and children with cerebral palsy: possibilities for intervention?

The basic level of postural control is functionally active from early infancy onwards: young infants possess a repertoire of direction-specific postural adjustments. Whether or not direction-specific adjustments are used depends on the child's age and the nature of the postural task. The second level of control emerges after 3 months: children start to develop the capacity to adapt postural activity to environmental constraints. But the adult form of postural adaptation first emerges after adolescence. Children with cerebral palsy (CP) in general have the ability to generate direction-specific adjustments, but they show a delayed development in the capacity to recruit direction-specific adjustments in tasks with a mild postural challenge. Children with CP virtually always have difficulties in the adaptation of direction-specific activity. The limited data available on the effect of intervention on postural development suggest that intervention involving active trial and error experience may accelerate postural development in typically developing infants and may improve postural control in children with or at high risk for a developmental motor disorder.

A systematic review of the effects of early intervention on motor development.

We present a systematic review on the effect of early intervention, starting between birth and a corrected age of 18 months, on motor development in infants at high risk for, or with, developmental motor disorders. Thirty-four studies fulfilled the selection criteria. Seventeen studies were performed within the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) environment. Eight studies had a high methodological quality. They evaluated various forms of intervention. Results indicated that the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program (NIDCAP) intervention might have a temporary positive effect on motor development. Twelve of the 17 post-NICU studies had a high methodological quality. They addressed the effect of neurodevelopmental treatment (NDT) and specific or general developmental programmes. The results showed that intervention in accordance with the principles of NDT does not have a beneficial effect on motor development. They also indicated that specific or general developmental programmes can have a positive effect on motor outcome. We concluded that the type of intervention that might be beneficial for infants at preterm age differs from the type that is effective in infants who have reached at least term age. Preterm infants seem to benefit most from intervention that aims at mimicking the intrauterine environment, such as NIDCAP intervention. After term age, intervention by means of specific or general developmental programmes has a positive effect on motor development.