Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
Meta-Analysis
. 2021 Apr 29;21(1):210.
doi: 10.1186/s12887-021-02559-6.

Effectiveness of interventions on early neurodevelopment of preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Marilyn Aita  1   2   3 , Gwenaëlle De Clifford Faugère  4   5 , Andréane Lavallée  4   5 , Nancy Feeley  6   7   8 , Robyn Stremler  9   10 , Émilie Rioux  4   11 , Marie-Hélène Proulx  4
Affiliations
Meta-Analysis

Effectiveness of interventions on early neurodevelopment of preterm infants: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Marilyn Aita et al. BMC Pediatr. .

Abstract

Background: As preterm infants' neurodevelopment is shaped by NICU-related factors during their hospitalization, it is essential to evaluate which interventions are more beneficial for their neurodevelopment at this specific time. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to evaluate the effectiveness of interventions initiated during NICU hospitalization on preterm infants' early neurodevelopment during their hospitalization and up to two weeks corrected age (CA).

Methods: This systematic review referred to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses [PRISMA] guidelines and was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42017047072). We searched CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed, EMBASE (OVID), Cochrane Systematic Reviews, CENTRAL, and Web of Science from 2002 to February 2020 and included randomized controlled/clinical trials conducted with preterm infants born between 24 and 366/7 weeks of gestation. All types of interventions instigated during NICU hospitalization were included. Two independent reviewers performed the study selection, data extraction, assessment of risks of bias and quality of evidence.

Results: Findings of 12 studies involving 901 preterm infants were synthesized. We combined three studies in a meta-analysis showing that compared to standard care, the NIDCAP intervention is effective in improving preterm infants' neurobehavioral and neurological development at two weeks CA. We also combined two other studies in a meta-analysis indicating that parental participation did not significantly improve preterm infants' neurobehavioral development during NICU hospitalization. For all other interventions (i.e., developmental care, sensory stimulation, music and physical therapy), the synthesis of results shows that compared to standard care or other types of comparators, the effectiveness was either controversial or partially effective.

Conclusions: The overall quality of evidence was rated low to very low. Future studies are needed to identify interventions that are the most effective in promoting preterm infants' early neurodevelopment during NICU hospitalization or close to term age. Interventions should be appropriately designed to allow comparison with previous studies and a combination of different instruments could provide a more global assessment of preterm infants' neurodevelopment and thus allow for comparisons across studies.

Trial registration: Prospero CRD42017047072 .

Keywords: Interventions; Meta-analysis; NICU; Neurodevelopment; Preterm infants; Systematic review.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no competing interests.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
PRISMA Flow diagram
Fig. 2
Fig. 2
Risk of bias summary: review authors’ judgements about each risk of bias item for each included study
Fig. 3
Fig. 3
NIDCAP vs. Standard care for the neurobehavioral development (autonomic system - APIB)
Fig. 4
Fig. 4
NIDCAP vs. Standard care for the neurobehavioral development (motor system - APIB)
Fig. 5
Fig. 5
NIDCAP vs. Standard care for neurological development (Prechtl)
Fig. 6
Fig. 6
Parental participation programs vs. Standard care forn eurobehavioral development (NNE)
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Aylward GP. Neurodevelopmental outcomes of infants born prematurely. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2014;35(6):394–407. doi: 10.1097/01.DBP.0000452240.39511.d4. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Pickler RH, McGrath JM, Reyna BA, McCain N, Lewis M, Cone S, et al. A model of neurodevelopmental risk and protection for preterm infants. J Perinat Neonatal Nurs. 2010;24(4):356–365. doi: 10.1097/JPN.0b013e3181fb1e70. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Volpe JJ. Brain injury in premature infants: a complex amalgam of destructive and developmental disturbances. Lancet Neurol. 2009;8(1):110–124. doi: 10.1016/S1474-4422(08)70294-1. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Rogers EE, Hintz SR. Early neurodevelopmental outcomes of extremely preterm infants. Semin Perinatol. 2016;40(8):497–509. doi: 10.1053/j.semperi.2016.09.002. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Eryigit Madzwamuse S, Baumann N, Jaekel J, Bartmann P, Wolke D. Neuro-cognitive performance of very preterm or very low birth weight adults at 26 years. J Child Psychol Psychiatry. 2015;56(8):857–864. doi: 10.1111/jcpp.12358. - DOI - PubMed

Publication types