medigraphic.com
ISSN 2007-6053 (Print)
Órgano oficial de difusión de los Hospitales Regionales de Alta Especialidad (HRAE)

2014, Number 2

<< Back Next >>

Evid Med Invest Salud 2014; 7 (2)

Teleton System of Children’s Rehabilitation Centers Oaxaca Telethon Center for Children’s Rehabilitation Importance of Cognitive-Perceptual evaluation in school children diagnosed with myelomeningocele

González SB

Language: Spanish
References: 25
Page: 63-69
PDF size: 300.75 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Introduction: Myelomeningocele is a defect in neural tube closure, affecting 1.2:1,000 live births in Mexico. The main complication is the motor limitation in the lower limbs. Long-term cognitive alterations are reported. Objective: To identify cognitive disorders in children 6 to 12 years with myelomeningocele. Methods: A descriptive, prospective, case-control study, the two groups with 14 participants test was applied (Dynamic Occupational Therapy Cognitive Assessment for Children). Results: The two groups were evaluated. For quantitative variables was performed t Student test. Items of orientation, special perception, praxis, visuomotor construction, immediate memory, memory held and operational processing was obtained p ≤ 0.005. For qualitative variables was obtained χ2: orientation p = 0.005, special perception p = 0.01, praxis p = 0.005, visuomotor construction p = 0.005, immediate memory p = 0.005, memory held p = 0.005 and operational processing p = 0.005. Case group 2 children (14.3%) attending special school. Conclusion: There are cognitive disorders in school age children with myelomeningocele.


REFERENCES

  1. Medina A, Coutiño B, Alvarado G, Ramírez J. Epidemiología del mielomeningocele en niños menores de un año de edad en el Instituto Nacional de Pediatría. Rev Mex Med Fis Rehab. 2001; 13: 50-54.

  2. Antuña A, García G, Alamar M, Guillén A, Costa J. Meningocele sacro anterior oculto. Neurocirugía. 2011; 22: 342-346.

  3. Otárola B, Rostion A. Desarrollo embrionario y defectos del cierre del tubo neural. Rev Ped Elec. 2007; 4 (3): 34-41.

  4. Shaer C, Chescheir N, Schulkin J. Myelomeningocele: a review of the epidemiology, genetics, risk factors of conception, prenatal diagnosis and prognosis for affected individuals. Obstet Gynecol Surv. 2007; 62 (7): 471-479.

  5. Lindquist B, Persson E, Uvebrant P, Carlsson G. Learning, memory and executive functions in children with hydrocephalus. Journal Compilation/Acta Paedriat. 2008; 97: 596-601.

  6. González A, García M. Ácido fólico y defectos del tubo neural en atención primaria. MEDIAFAM. 2003; 13: 305-310.

  7. Mancebo A, González A, Díaz L, López M, Domínguez W, Serrano A. Defectos del tubo neural: panorama epidemiológico en México (I-III). Acta Pediatr Mex. 2008; 29 (1): 41-47.

  8. Hamdan A, Walsh W, Heddings A, Bruner J, Tulipan N. Gestational age at intrauterine myelomeningocele repair does not influence the risk of prematurity. Fetal Diagn Ther. 2002; 17: 66-68. Pro Quest Hospital Collection.

  9. Rivero L, Espína B. Neurokinesioterapia [Internet]. 2001. Disponible en: http://usuarios.multimania.es/neurokyk/docs/neurokinesio/12_EspinaBifida.ppdf

  10. Suárez F, Ordóñez A, Phil M, Zarante I. Defectos del tubo neural y ácido fólico: patogenia, metabolismo y desarrollo embriológico. Revisión de la literatura. Rev Colom Obstet Ginecol. 2010; 61: 49-60.

  11. Blesedell ECE, Boyt B. Terapia ocupacional. 11a ed. Madrid, España: Médica Panamericana; 2011. pp. 118-156.

  12. Awad JS. The dynamic occupational therapy cognitive assessment for children (DOTCA- Ch): pilot study of inter-rater and test retest reliability. Tesis de maestría publicada. An-Najah National University, Nablus, Palestine. 2012.

  13. Lollard D. El aprendizaje en los niños con espina bífida. Asociación de espina bífida. Washington: 2012. Extraído el 5 de mayo de 2012 desde: http://www.spinabifidaassociation.org/atf/cf/%7BEED435C8-F1A0-4A16-B4D8-A713BBCD9CE4%7D/sp_learning_among_children.pdf

  14. Mulligan S. Terapia ocupacional en pediatría: procesos de evaluación. Madrid: Médica Panamericana; 2006. pp. 35-125.

  15. Champagne T, Koomar J. Evaluating sensory processing in mental health occupational therapy practice. OT Practice. 2012; 17 (5): 1-9.

  16. Forgus R. Percepción: estudio del desarrollo cognoscitivo. 2a ed. México: Trillas; 2003.

  17. Grieve J. Neuropsicología para terapeutas ocupacionales. 2a ed. Madrid, España: Médica Panamericana; 2000. pp. 75-115.

  18. Ardila A, Ostrosky F. Guía para el diagnóstico neuropsicológico. Miami, Florida EUA: American Board of Professional Neuropsychology; 2012. pp. 127-173.

  19. Lezak M, Howieson D, Coring D. Neuropsychological assessment. 4a ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2004.

  20. Pereyra R. Batería neuropsicológica exploratoria para niños en español. Rev Elect Psic Izta. 2006; 9: 43-62.

  21. Kielhofner G. Fundamentos conceptuales de la terapia ocupacional. 3a ed. Madrid, España: Médica Panamericana; 2006.

  22. Ávila A, Viana I, Durán M, Peralbo M. Revisión bibliográfica sobre la batería Lowenstein occupational therapy cognitive assessment (LOTCA) and dynamic occupational therapy cognitive assessment for children (DOTCA-Ch). Rev TOG. 2009; 5 (2): 1-7.

  23. Katz N, Bar-Haim A, Livni L, Averbuch S. Dynamic Lowenstein occupational therapy cognitive assessment: evaluation of potential to change in cognitive performance. Am J Occup Ther. 2012; 66 (2): 207-214.

  24. García N, Rigau E, Artigas J. Perfil neurocognitivo del trastorno de aprendizaje no verbal. Rev de Neurol. 2006; 43 (5): 268-274.

  25. Polonio BDP, Noya B. Conceptos fundamentales de terapia ocupacional. Madrid, España: Médica Panamericana; 2001: pp. 15-25.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com