medigraphic.com
ISSN 1025-0255 (Electronic)

2015, Number 3

<< Back Next >>

AMC 2015; 19 (3)

Personalized program of rehabilitation exercises for infants with impaired vision and delay of the psychomotor development

Miranda RMÁ, Osoria CA, Santana ÁJ, García ÁY

Language: Spanish
References: 26
Page: 247-261
PDF size: 523.70 Kb.


ABSTRACT

Background: the integration and social improvement of the standard of living of infants with impaired vision and delay of the psychomotor development is a challenge for rehabilitation medicine specialists since this is a disabling disease from the motor point of view.
Objective: to analyze the results of the application of a methodological guide to avoid the appearance of atypical courses of development in infants between the ages of 1 month and 12 months and newborns with the diagnosis of impaired vision, thus stimulating psychomotor development at short age in the family context.
Methods: an exploratory, inclusive, qualitative, observational, only-case study, according to Bogdan and Bicklen was conducted by means of non-probabilistic sampling in an infant, born in February 2011, with impaired vision caused by congenital coloboma of the optic nerve and psychomotor delay. The patient was treated by means of a personalized program of rehabilitation exercises for infants with impaired vision and delay of the psychomotor development. Thirty-three exercises were selected according to the physical education program for infants and defined as following: work time, number of repetitions, method and means to perform the exercises.
Results: the program took as reference the initial evaluation and the physical development of the patient during the course of the weeks on rehabilitation treatment. The systematic application of the exercises was completely new. The infant walked for the first time and explored the surrounding environment. The patient improved his motor development, manual skills and language and accelerated his cognitive development and comprehension of the environment.
Conclusions: the exercises program gave the possibility of evaluating the therapeutic influence in the rapid integration of the infant to society with a full achievement of his psychomotor development in the less possible time.


REFERENCES

  1. Halfon N, Regalado M, Sareen H, Inkelas M, Reuland CH, Glascoe FP, et al. Assessing de-velopment in the pediatric office. Pediatrics. 2004; 113(6 Suppl):1926-33.

  2. Estadísticas de la Educación en España. [Internet]. Madrid: Ministerio de Educación, Cultura y Deporte de España, Inc.; c1998-1999[actualizado 10 feb 2015; citado 8 Mar 2015]. Disponible en: http://www.sid.usal.es

  3. Pérez Álvarez L, Yera Álvarez ML. Frecuencia de cursos atípicos del desarrollo en niños en edad pre-escolar. AMC [Internet]. Ago 2007 [citado 8 Mar 2015];11(4):[aprox. 12 p.]. Dis-ponible en: http://scielo.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1025-02552007000400005&lng=es.

  4. Pérez Álvarez L, Mendiondo Ramos P. La pará-lisis cerebral infantil: su impacto sobre el ajus-te emocional y desmpeño social de la madre. AMC [Internet]. Oct 2007 [citado 8 Mar 2015];11(5):[aprox. 12 p.]. Disponible en:http://scieloprueba.sld.cu/scielo.php? script=sci_arttext&pid=S1025-02552007000500007&lng=es.

  5. Organización Mundial de la Salud. Clasificación Internacional del funcionamiento de la discapa-cidad y de la salud. España: INSERSO; 2001.

  6. Bhutta AT, Cleves MA, Casey PH, Cradock MN, Anand KJ. Cognitive and behavioral outcomes of school-age children who were born preterm: a meta-analysis. Jama. 2002;288(6):728-37.

  7. Arencibia Pérez J. Discapacidad, deficiencia y rehabilitación. Vol.1 En: Álvarez Sintes R, edi-tor Temas de Medicina General Integral. La Ha-bana: Editorial Ciencias Médica; 2001. p. 195-201.

  8. Vohr L, Wright LL, Dusik AM, Mele L, Verter J, Steichen JJ, et al. Neurodevelopmental and functional outcomes of extremely low birth weight infants in the National Institute of Chile Health and Human Development Neonatal Re-search Network, 1993-1994”. Pediatrics. 2000;105(6):1216-26.

  9. OShea TM, Dammann O. Antecedents of cere-bral palsy in very low-birth weight in-fants.Clinics Perinatology. 2000;27:285-302.

  10. American Academy of Pediatrics. Committe on Children with Disabilities: Developmental sur-veillance and screening of infants and young children. Pediatrics. 2001;108:192-6.

  11. Shevell M, Ashwall S, Donley D, Flint J, Gin-gold M, Hirtz D, et al. Practice parameter: evaluation of the child with global developmen-tal delay: report of the Quality Standards Sub-committee of the American Academy of neurol-ogy and the practice Committee of the Child Neurology Society. Neurology. 2003;60(3):367-80.

  12. Rodríguez Gómez G, Gil Flores J, García Jimé-nez E. Metodología de la investigación cuanti-tativa. Editorial Félix Varela. Ciudad de la Ha-bana: Cuba; 2006.

  13. Sices L, Feudtner C, McLaughlin J. How do pri-mary care physicians identify young children with developmental delays? A national survey. J Dev Behav Pediatr. 2003;24(6):409-17.

  14. Pérez Álvarez L, Hernández Vidal A. Frecuencia de cursos atípicos del desarrollo en niños me-nores de un año. AMC [Internet]. Jun 2007 [citado 8 Mar 2015];11(3):[aprox. 14 p.]. Dis-ponible en: http://scieloprueba.sld.cu/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S102502552007000300010&lng=es.

  15. Artiles Visual L, Otero Iglesias J, Barrios Osu-ma I. Metodología de la investigación para las Ciencias Médicas de la Salud. La Habana: Edi-torial Ciencias Médicas; 2009.

  16. Kelberman D, Islam L, Lakowski J, Bacchelli C, Chanudet E, Lescai F, et al. Mutation of SAL-L2 causes recessive ocular coloboma in hu-mans and mice. 2014 May 15;23(10):2511-26.

  17. Cai Z, Tao C, Li H, Ladher R, Gotoh N, Feng GS, et al. Deficient FGF signaling causes optic nerve dysgenesis and ocular coloboma. Devel-opment. 2013 Jul;140(13):2711-23.

  18. Denis D, Girard N, Levy-Mozziconacci A, Ber-bis J, Matonti F. Ocular coloboma and results of brain MRI: preliminary results. J Fr Ophtalmol. 2013 Mar;36(3):210-20.

  19. Bogdan RC, Biklen SK. Qualitative reseca for education: introduction to theory and methods. Londres: Allyn and Bacon; 1982.

  20. Biasini FJ, De Jong D, Ryan S, Thorsten V, Bann C, Bellad R, et al. Development of a 12month screener based on items from the Bayley II Scales of Infant Development for use in Low Middle Income countries. Early Hum Dev. 2015 Feb 27;91(4):253-8.

  21. Perra O, McGowan JE, Grunau RE, Doran JB, Craig S, Johnston L, et. al. Parent ratings of child cognition and language compared with Bayley-III in preterm 3-year-olds. Early Hum Dev. 2015 Mar;91(3):211-6. doi: 10.1016/j.

  22. Sahal D, Yee K. Delphi: An lnvestigation from a bayesian viewpoint, Technological Forecasting and Social Change. Sanders. 1975; 7(7): 165-178.

  23. Scheibe M, Skutsch M, Schofer J. Experiment in Delphi Methodology. En: Linstone HA, Turoff M, editors. The Delphi Method: Techniques and Applicadons. Massachussets: Addison-Wesley; 1975.p. 262-287

  24. Campbel D. Factor relevantto the validity of experimrntals in socialsetings. Psyhcological Bulletin. 1957;54 (4):297-312.

  25. Battaglia A, Carey JC. Diagnostic evaluation of developmental delay /mental retardation: An Overview. Am J med Genet. 2003;117(1):3-14.

  26. Msall ME. The vulnerable preschool child: the impact of biomedical and social risks on neuro-developmental functions. Semin Pediatr Neu-rol. 1998;5(1):52-61.




2020     |     www.medigraphic.com