Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Preliminary study shows enhanced motor repertoire in high-risk infants with brain injury after rehabilitation.
Background/Objectives: Abnormal general movements (GMs) in high-risk infants are among the most sensitive early predictors of cerebral palsy (CP) and other neurodevelopmental disorders. This study described changes in the quality of GMs over time in high-risk infants who received the Early Intensive Stojčević–Polovina Rehabilitation Method (EIR–SPM). The EIR–SPM is a rehabilitation method designed for children with CP, those at risk of developing CP, and children with other developmental disabilities. In high-risk infants, it is initiated within the first three months of corrected age, preferably while writhing movements (WMs) are still present. Methods: This study was conducted in eight high-risk infants with abnormal WMs and structural brain injury. The EIR–SPM was initiated between 41 and 47 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA) and was applied until 60 weeks PMA. Prechtl’s General Movements Assessment (GMA), the Detailed GM score, and the Motor Optimality Score–Revised (MOS–R) were assessed. Results: During the writhing period, two infants showed a poor repertoire (PR) pattern and six showed a cramped–synchronized (CS) pattern of GMs; at follow-up, three showed PR, and five showed CS. During the fidgety period, two infants showed normal fidgety movements (F+), two sporadic fidgety movements (sFM), one infant showed abnormal fidgety movements (aFM), and three showed absent fidgety movements (F−) at the first assessment, while at the second assessment, three infants showed F+, two sFM, one aFM, and two F−. The median Detailed GM score increased from 12 (range 11–17) to 13.5 (range 11–19; p = 0.068). The median MOS–R increased from 17.0 (range 12–24) to 19.5 (range 17–27) between the two fidgety assessments (p = 0.027). Conclusions: Improvements in motor repertoire, reflected by increased MOS–R scores, were observed during the EIR–SPM initiated in the writhing period. Larger controlled studies are needed to confirm these preliminary observations.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Polovina et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: