A comparison of the general movements assessment with traditional approaches to newborn and infant assessment: Concurrent validity

BackgroundAssessment of the quality of general movements (GMs) is an early clinical marker for prediction of cerebral palsy.AimsTo explore how the General Movements Assessment (GMsA) relates to traditional newborn and infant measures currently in use.Study designA prospective cohort design was used to examine concurrent validity of the GMsA in Neonatal Intensive Care (NICU) survivors (n = 100) at three age points: preterm (34 weeks gestational age GA), term (38–40 weeks GA), and post term (12 weeks adjusted age [AA]) with traditional assessments (see below).Correlation analysis was used to determine the strength of the associations between tests at each age point.SubjectsPreterm infants born at ≤ 32 weeks gestational age and birth weight < 1500 g (n = 108) were recruited sequentially from the NICU of a large teaching hospital and referral centre. Infants with diagnoses of metabolic disorders, cardiac, chromosomal, or congenital abnormalities were excluded.Outcome measuresTest of Infant Motor Performance (TIMP), Einstein Neonatal Neurobehavioral Assessment Scale (ENNAS), Alberta Infant Motor Scales (AIMS).ResultsA low-strength relationship (r = < 0.25) was found between the GMsA and the traditional tests which increased across age points (r = 0.25–0.50). Relationships between the traditional tests over time was characterized by stronger associations (r = 0.50–0.75).ConclusionsEvidence of concurrent validity of the GMsA with traditional assessments was not found. These early findings support Prechtl's suggestion that GMs reflect a unique neurologic construct, different from traditional tests and reinforce the complementary perspective which the GMsA brings to neonatal assessment.