Neonatal care and developmental outcomes following preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

IF 3.1 2区 心理学 Q2 PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL Developmental Psychology Pub Date : 2024-10-31 DOI:10.1037/dev0001844
Or Burstein, Tamara Aryeh, Ronny Geva
{"title":"Neonatal care and developmental outcomes following preterm birth: A systematic review and meta-analysis.","authors":"Or Burstein, Tamara Aryeh, Ronny Geva","doi":"10.1037/dev0001844","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Major amendments in neonatal care have been introduced in recent decades. It is important to understand whether these amendments improved the cognitive sequelae of preterm children. Through a large-scale meta-analysis, we explored the association between prematurity-related complications, neonatal care quality, and cognitive development from birth until 7 years. MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, and EBSCO were searched. Peer-reviewed studies published between 1970 and 2022 using standardized tests were included. We evaluated differences between preterm and full-term children in focal developmental domains using random-effects meta-analyses. We analyzed data from 161 studies involving 39,799 children. Preterm birth was associated with inferior outcomes in global cognitive development (standardized mean difference = -0.57, 95% CI [-0.63, -0.52]), as well as in language/communication, visuospatial, and motor performance, reflecting mean decreases of approximately 7.3 to 9.3 developmental/intelligence quotients. Extreme prematurity, neonatal pulmonary morbidities, and older assessment age in very-to-extreme preterm cohorts were associated with worse outcomes. Contemporary neonatal medical and developmental care were associated with transient improvements in global cognitive development, evident until 2 to 3 years of age but not after. Blinding of examiners to participants' gestational background was associated with poorer outcomes in preterm cohorts, suggesting the possibility of a \"compassion bias.\" The results suggest that preterm birth remains associated with poorer cognitive development in early childhood, especially following pulmonary diseases and very-to-extreme preterm delivery. Importantly, deficits become more pervasive with age, but only after births before 32 gestational weeks and not in moderate-to-late preterm cohorts. Care advancements show promising signs of promoting resiliency in the early years but need further refinements throughout childhood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).</p>","PeriodicalId":48464,"journal":{"name":"Developmental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Developmental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1037/dev0001844","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Major amendments in neonatal care have been introduced in recent decades. It is important to understand whether these amendments improved the cognitive sequelae of preterm children. Through a large-scale meta-analysis, we explored the association between prematurity-related complications, neonatal care quality, and cognitive development from birth until 7 years. MEDLINE, APA PsycInfo, and EBSCO were searched. Peer-reviewed studies published between 1970 and 2022 using standardized tests were included. We evaluated differences between preterm and full-term children in focal developmental domains using random-effects meta-analyses. We analyzed data from 161 studies involving 39,799 children. Preterm birth was associated with inferior outcomes in global cognitive development (standardized mean difference = -0.57, 95% CI [-0.63, -0.52]), as well as in language/communication, visuospatial, and motor performance, reflecting mean decreases of approximately 7.3 to 9.3 developmental/intelligence quotients. Extreme prematurity, neonatal pulmonary morbidities, and older assessment age in very-to-extreme preterm cohorts were associated with worse outcomes. Contemporary neonatal medical and developmental care were associated with transient improvements in global cognitive development, evident until 2 to 3 years of age but not after. Blinding of examiners to participants' gestational background was associated with poorer outcomes in preterm cohorts, suggesting the possibility of a "compassion bias." The results suggest that preterm birth remains associated with poorer cognitive development in early childhood, especially following pulmonary diseases and very-to-extreme preterm delivery. Importantly, deficits become more pervasive with age, but only after births before 32 gestational weeks and not in moderate-to-late preterm cohorts. Care advancements show promising signs of promoting resiliency in the early years but need further refinements throughout childhood. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, all rights reserved).

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
早产儿出生后的新生儿护理和发育结果:系统回顾和荟萃分析。
近几十年来,对新生儿护理进行了重大改革。了解这些修订是否改善了早产儿的认知后遗症非常重要。通过大规模的荟萃分析,我们探讨了早产儿相关并发症、新生儿护理质量与出生至 7 岁期间认知发展之间的关系。我们检索了 MEDLINE、APA PsycInfo 和 EBSCO。纳入了 1970 年至 2022 年间发表的使用标准化测试的同行评审研究。我们采用随机效应荟萃分析法评估了早产儿和足月儿在重点发展领域的差异。我们分析了 161 项研究的数据,涉及 39799 名儿童。早产儿在整体认知发展(标准化平均差异 = -0.57,95% CI [-0.63, -0.52])以及语言/沟通、视觉空间和运动表现方面的结果均较差,反映出发育/智力商数平均下降了约 7.3 到 9.3。极度早产、新生儿肺部疾病以及极度早产至极度早产队列中评估年龄较大与较差的结果有关。现代新生儿医疗和发育护理与整体认知发展的短暂改善有关,这种改善在2至3岁前很明显,但在2至3岁后就不明显了。在早产儿队列中,检查人员对参与者妊娠背景的盲法与较差的结果有关,这表明可能存在 "同情偏差"。研究结果表明,早产仍然与儿童早期较差的认知发展有关,尤其是在肺部疾病和极度早产之后。重要的是,随着年龄的增长,早产儿的缺陷会变得更加普遍,但这只发生在妊娠周数在32周之前的早产儿身上,而不发生在中晚期早产儿群组中。护理方面的进步显示出在幼儿期促进恢复能力的良好迹象,但在整个儿童期还需要进一步完善。(PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2024 APA, 版权所有)。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Developmental Psychology
Developmental Psychology PSYCHOLOGY, DEVELOPMENTAL-
CiteScore
5.80
自引率
2.50%
发文量
329
期刊介绍: Developmental Psychology ® publishes articles that significantly advance knowledge and theory about development across the life span. The journal focuses on seminal empirical contributions. The journal occasionally publishes exceptionally strong scholarly reviews and theoretical or methodological articles. Studies of any aspect of psychological development are appropriate, as are studies of the biological, social, and cultural factors that affect development. The journal welcomes not only laboratory-based experimental studies but studies employing other rigorous methodologies, such as ethnographies, field research, and secondary analyses of large data sets. We especially seek submissions in new areas of inquiry and submissions that will address contradictory findings or controversies in the field as well as the generalizability of extant findings in new populations. Although most articles in this journal address human development, studies of other species are appropriate if they have important implications for human development. Submissions can consist of single manuscripts, proposed sections, or short reports.
期刊最新文献
Does inducing growth-oriented mindsets about math ability in parents enhance children's math mindsets, affect, and achievement? How relations between early reading skills and third-grade mathematics outcomes vary across distribution: A quantile regression approach. Children's social preference for peers engaged in brilliance-required activities: The impact of gender and race. The development of math skills from grades 1 to 12: Novel findings using person-oriented approach. The effect of unconditional cash transfers on maternal assessments of children's early language and socioemotional development: Experimental evidence from U.S. families residing in poverty.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1