in

ialton,

eeenvith

motor impairment are associated with comorbidities, which may have a greater effect on quality of life,

e moents int can ve most

weeks of gestation) have a different trajectory of motor develop-

lower proportion of fast-twitch bres), along with further alter-ations in brain maturation [3,5,6]. In addition, environmental

movements [2,8]. A meta-analysis of motor outcomes for childrentional age) or veryg) reported that,W children scoreddifference: 0.88;the psychomotor

during infancy (6eldren born VPT orers on two of thent, the Movement

95% CI: 0.69 to0.55) and the BruininkseOseretsky Test of MotorPerformance (BOTMP) (mean difference: 0.53; 95% CI: 0.60to 0.46) [1].

Research on long-term motor outcomes is limited by inconsis-tency in classication of motor impairments, selection of pop-ulations of infants (by birthweight and/or gestational age) and toolsused to determine impairment, making the ndings difcult toreadily synthesize [7,9,10]. Whereas it is evident that many children

* Corresponding author. Address: VIBeS, Murdoch Childrens Research Institute,Flemington Road, Parkville, Victoria 3052, Australia. Tel.: 61 3 8345 3778; fax: 613 93454836.

Contents lists availab

Seminars in Fetal &

journal homepage: www.e

Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 19 (2014) 84e89E-mail address: alicia.spittle@mcri.edu.au (A.J. Spittle).height, and head circumference) and smaller muscle size (with a Assessment Battery of Children (MABC) (mean difference: 0.62;ment compared with those children born at full term [3]. Earlyexposure to the extrauterine environment results in alteredmovement (e.g. gravity) and sensory (e.g. light and sound) expe-riences on the developing musculoskeletal and central nervoussystems [2,4]. Further, the birth of an infant in the late second orearly in the third trimester during periods of rapid brain develop-ment is thought to disrupt the genetically programmed pattern ofbrain genesis [5]. Postnatally, biological factors that may inuencemotor development include insufcient growth (reduced weight,

very preterm (VPT dened as

l &born preterm have variations in their motor developmentcompared with peers born at term, it is not always clear whetherthese variations result in long-term motor impairments [3,11]. It isessential to understand and distinguish the range of motor im-pairments experienced by children born preterm including mildmotor impairment and developmental coordination disorder (DCD)from CP, so that the most appropriate interventions can be imple-mented early and caregivers have an understanding of long-termmotor function [12].

2. Cerebral palsy

Cerebral palsy is primarily a motor disorder and is an um-brella term to describe a group of disorders of the developmentof movement and posture, causing activity limitations, which areattributed to non-progressive disturbances that occurred in thedeveloping fetal or infant brain [13]. The prevalence of CP in thegeneral population varies slightly between countries and is about0.1e0.2% of live births [10,14]. A recent review of CP registries inAustralia from 1970 to 2004 reported that the prevalence of CPincreased in the 1970s and 1980s due to the increasing survivalof extremely preterm (EP: dened as

l &literature on DCD and non-CP motor impairment. In childrenwithout CP, mild motor impairment often refers to children whoscore between the 5th and 15th centile or 1 SD below the mean,and moderate as

l &Magnesium sulphate given to mothers when preterm labour isimminent has been shown to have a neuroprotective role and re-duces the risk of CP in their child [relative risk (RR): 0.68; 95% CI:0.54e0.87] and a reduction in the rate of substantial gross motordysfunction (0.61; 0.44e0.85) [47]. Caffeine for the treatment ofapnoea of prematurity has also been found to reduce the incidenceof CP (adjusted OR: 0.58; 95% CI: 0.39e0.87), and at 5 years relatedto improvement in GMFCS classication and MABC scores [48,49].These two neuroprotective interventions, along with the reducedusage of postnatal corticosteroids to treat bronchopulmonarydysplasia, may explain the diminishing rates of CP reported bysome studies in the 2000s [21].

7. Recommendations for follow-up

The American Academy of Pediatrics has published recom-mendations for follow-up of VLBW infants, which include astructured age-appropriate neuromotor examination at leastonce during the rst 6 months of life, followed by an examina-tion once during the second 6 months, at the ages of 1e2, 2e3,3e4 and 4e5 years [50]. Some of the motor impairments expe-rienced in children born preterm are apparent very early indevelopment, although follow-up throughout childhood isnecessary to accurately diagnose DCD and the milder forms of CP.Prediction of CP in the early months is now more reliable withthe use of assessment tools such as the general movements(GMs) and MRI which have high sensitivity and specicity[12,44,51]. Both abnormal GMs and MRI ndings have beenassociated with milder motor impairments, but the association isnot as strong as that with CP [52,53]. Whereas neither of thesetools should be used for diagnosis of CP in the newborn period,care-givers can be counselled about risk factors, the importanceof ongoing assessment and the infant enrolled in early inter-vention [12,33].

The age at which the diagnosis of CP is made is variable, withmisdiagnosis common prior to the age of 18 months [51]. At 2years the GMFCS can provide accurate prognostic information onfuture independent function for children with CP [12]. The diag-nosis of DCD is best made from the age of 5 years for a number ofreasons according to the European Academy for ChildhoodDisability (EACD) consensus for denition and diagnosis of DCDincluding the catch-up that younger children make in the earlyyears and the reliability of assessment tools for both motor anddaily living skills [24]. The EACD recommend using a score 15thpercentile on the MABC (or equivalent assessment) to classifychildren as DCD, whereas previous guidelines published in 2006recommended using a score

l &Conict of interest

None declared.

Funding sources

None.

References

*[1] de Kieviet JF, Piek JP, Aarnoudse-Moens CS, Oosterlaan J. Motor developmentin very preterm and very low-birth-weight children from birth to adoles-cence: a meta-analysis. JAMA 2009;302:2235e42.

[2] Bracewell M, Marlow N. Patterns of motor disability in very preterm children.Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev 2002;8:241e8.

[3] van Haastert IC, de Vries LS, Helders PJ, Jongmans MJ. Early gross motordevelopment of preterm infants according to the Alberta Infant Motor Scale.J Pediatr 2006;149:617e22.

[4] Fallang B, Hadders-Algra M. Postural behavior in children born preterm.Neural Plasticity 2005;12:175e82.

[5] Volpe JJ. Neurology of the newborn brain. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Saunders;

Research directions

Consistent classification of motor impairment is neededin the reporting of long-term outcomes of children bornpreterm.

Further understanding of the causal pathways and pre-dicting those children most at risk of motor impairmentare needed to inform interventions.

Practice points

Motor impairment is common in children born pretermand can range in severity from mild to severe, includingDCD and CP.

MRI and GMs assessments in the newborn period arepredictive of later motor impairment, including DCD andCP.

DCD is highly prevalent in children born preterm andtherefore follow-up needs to continue to at least 5 years ofage.

A.J. Spittle, J. Orton / Seminars in Feta882002.[6] Cooke RW, Foulder-Hughes L. Growth impairment in the very preterm and

cognitive and motor performance at 7 years. Arch Dis Child 2003;88:482e7.[7] Saigal S, Doyle LW. An overview of mortality and sequelae of preterm birth

from infancy to adulthood. Lancet 2008;371(9608):261e9.[8] Brown NC, Doyle LW, Bear MJ, Inder TE. Alterations in neurobehavior at term

reect differing perinatal exposures in very preterm infants. Pediatrics2006;118:2461e71.

*[9] Williams J, Lee KJ, Anderson PJ. Prevalence of motor-skill impairment inpreterm children who do not develop cerebral palsy: a systematic review.Dev Med Child Neurol 2010;52:232e7.

*[10] Himpens E, Van den Broeck C, Oostra A, Calders P, Vanhaesebrouck P. Prev-alence, type, distribution, and severity of cerebral palsy in relation togestational age: a meta-analytic review. Dev Med Child Neurol 2008;50:334e40.

[11] Rosenbaum P. Classication of abnormal neurological outcome. Early HumDev 2006;82:167e71.

*[12] McIntyre S, Morgan C, Walker K, Novak I. Cerebral palsy e dont delay. DevDisabil Res Rev 2011;17:114e29.

[13] Bax M, Goldstein M, Rosenbaum P, et al. Proposed denition and classica-tion of cerebral palsy, April 2005. Dev Med Child Neurol 2005;47:571e6.

[14] Reid SM, Carlin JB, Reddihough DS. Rates of cerebral palsy in Victoria,Australia, 1970 to 2004: has there been a change? Dev Med Child Neurol2011;53:907e12.

[15] Vohr BR, Msall ME, Wilson D, Wright LL, McDonald S, Poole WK. Spectrum ofgross motor function in extremely low birth weight children with cerebralpalsy at 18 months of age. Pediatrics 2005;116:123e9.

[16] Ancel P, Livinec F, Larroque B, et al. Cerebral palsy among very pretermchildren in relation to gestational age and neonatal ultrasound abnormal-ities: the EPIPAGE Cohort Study. Pediatrics 2006;117:828e35.[17] Surveillance of Cerebral Palsy in E. Surveillance of cerebral palsy in Europe: acollaboration of cerebral palsy surveys and registers. Surveillance of cerebralpalsy in Europe (SCPE). Dev Med Child Neurol 2000;42:816e24.

[18] Palisano R, Rosenbaum P, Walter S, Russell D, Wood E, Galuppi B. Develop-ment and reliability of a system to classify gross motor function in childrenwith cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol 1997;39:214e23.

[19] Himmelmann K, Beckung E, Hagberg G, Uvebrant P. Gross and ne motorfunction and accompanying impairments in cerebral palsy. Dev Med ChildNeurol 2006;48:417e23.

[20] Nordmark E, Hagglund G, Lagergren J. Cerebral palsy in southern Sweden II.Gross motor function and disabilities. Acta Paediatr 2001;90:1277e82.

[21] Victorian Infant Collaborative Study G. Outcomes at age 2 years of infants

[47] Doyle LW, Crowther CA, Middleton P, Marret S, Rouse D. Magnesium sulphatefor women at risk of preterm birth for neuroprotection of the fetus. CochraneDatabase Syst Rev 2009;(1):CD004661.

[48] Schmidt B, Anderson PJ, Doyle LW, et al. Survival without disability to age 5years after neonatal caffeine therapy for apnea of prematurity. JAMA2012;307:275e82.

[49] Schmidt B, Roberts RS, Davis P, et al. Long-term effects of caffeine therapy forapnea of prematurity. N Engl J Med 2007;357:1893e902.

*[50] Wang CJ, McGlynn EA, Brook RH, et al. Quality-of-care indicators for theneurodevelopmental follow-up of very low birth weight children: results ofan expert panel process. Pediatrics 2006;117:2080e92.

[51] BosanquetM, Copeland L,Ware R, Boyd R. A systematic reviewof tests to predictcerebral palsy in young children. Dev Med Child Neurol 2013;55:418e26.

[52] Spittle AJ, Spencer-Smith MM, Cheong JL, et al. General movements in verypreterm children and neurodevelopment at 2 and 4 years. Pediatrics2013;132:e452e8.

[53] Spittle AJ, Cheong J, Doyle LW, et al. Neonatal white matter abnormalitypredicts childhood motor impairment in very preterm children. Dev MedChild Neurol 2011;53:1000e6.

[54] Hadders-Algra M. Challenges and limitations in early intervention. Dev MedChild Neurol 2011;53(Suppl 4):52e5.

[55] Spittle A, Orton J, Anderson P, Boyd R, Doyle LW. Early developmentalintervention programmes post-hospital discharge to prevent motor andcognitive impairments in preterm infants. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2012;(12):CD005495.

[56] Majnemer A. Benets of early intervention for children with developmentaldisabilities. Semin Pediatr Neurol 1998;5:62e9.

[57] Smits-Engelsman BC, Blank R, van der Kaay AC, et al. Efcacy of interventionsto improve motor performance in children with developmental coordinationdisorder: a combined systematic review and meta-analysis. Dev Med ChildNeurol 2013;55:229e37.

A.J. Spittle, J. Orton / Seminars in Fetal & Neonatal Medicine 19 (2014) 84e89 89

Cerebral palsy and developmental coordination disorder in children born preterm1 Introduction2 Cerebral palsy3 Motor impairments in children without CP4 Comorbidities associated with motor impairment5 Neural mechanisms6 Perinatal risk factors7 Recommendations for follow-up8 Interventions to improve motor outcomes9 Future directions10 ConclusionsConflict of interestFunding sourcesReferences