Skip to main content
OpenTrials
Completed

NCT Number: NCT05264064

The Polish Version of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale: Cultural Adaptation and Validation

The aim of the study was to derive a Polish version of the AIMS through its cultural adaptation and validation. This process was based on an analysis of intra- and interrater reliability, as well as concurrent validity, using PDMS-2.

Completed

Looking for future studies?

Notify Me

Key information

Conditions

Age range

2 week–18 month

Sex eligibility

All sexes

Study type

Observational

Primary location

Poznan University of Medical Sciences

Poznan, Wielkopolska, 61-701, Poland

About this study

The monitoring infant motor development allows for detecting delays and disturbances, enabling, if necessary, early therapeutic interventions to prevent further structural and functional disorders. However, the developmental assessment should be performed using standardised tools, which need to undergo cultural adaptation adapted and validation. This process is necessary to ensure their reliability in countries, cultures, populations, and languages different than initially intended.

The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a diagnostic tool for the developmental evaluation of infants from the time of birth, to the period of independent walking (0-18 months), based on the observation of spontaneous motor performance [9,10]. It is based on several assumptions of the neuromaturational model and the concepts of the dynamic systems development theory. The AIMS was created in the early 1990s by Piper and Darrah, validated and standardised on the Canadian population [9,10]. Moreover, a 2014 re-evaluation of the scale noted that the normative values in this population remained stable.

The intended uses of the AIMS comprise: 1) identification of infants with motor delay, 2) providing medical professionals and parents information on motor achievements of the infant (both currently developing activities and those not observed in the infant's repertoire), 3) measurement of motor performance over time, or before and after an intervention, 4) as a research tool for the estimation of rehabilitation program efficacy in infants with motor delays .

The scale has been used (as an outcome measure) in numerous studies in healthy infants and those affected by or at risk of developmental disorders.

So far, research on the reliability and validity of the AIMS has been performed in Japanese, Chinese, Brazilian, Spanish, Thai, Greek, Dutch, Flemish and Serbian sample groups. However, there has not yet been a study conducted in any Middle European population.

The aim of the study was to derive a Polish version of the AIMS through its cultural adaptation and validation. This process was based on an analysis of the intra- and interrater reliability, as well as concurrent validity, using PDMS-2.

Who can participate

Healthy volunteers accepted: Yes

Only the study team can determine whether someone qualifies for participation.

Inclusion criteria

  • a gestational age between 37 and 42 weeks
  • birth weight of ≥ 2500 g
  • five-minute Apgar score ≥ 8.

Exclusion criteria

  • a gestational age < 37 weeks,
  • a birth weight < 2500 g,
  • five-minute Apgar score < 8
  • the presence of any neurological, orthopedic, genetic, metabolic, and sensory disorders.

Treatment and study plan

The motor assessment to establish validation of the Polish version of the AIMS

Other

The translation, cultural adaptation, and validation were conducted according to existing recommendations. The motor development of infants was assessed with the Polish scoresheet of the AlMS and the PDMS v.2. The examination was conducted by two peadiatric physiotherapists with a minimum 7 years of experience.The examination methodology was concordant with the recommendation of the authors of AIMS and PDMS-2.The intrarater reliability test included two assessments (with one-month interval) performed by one researcher (Rater A). For the second assessment, the videos of spontaneous motor performance of infants were recorded during the examination. The interrater reliability involved assessments by two researchers (Rater A, Rater B). The Gross Motor Scales of the PDMS v.2 was administered to estimate concurrent validity (participants at the age of 0-12 months).

Primary outcomes

  1. The reliability of the Polish version of the AIMS

    Time frame: 4 months

    The intrarater reliability test included two assessments (with one-month interval) of every participants with the Polish version AIMS performed by one researcher - a peadiatric physiotherapist (Rater A). For the second assessment, the videos of spontaneous motor performance of infants were recorded during the examination.

    The interrater reliability involved assessments of every participants by the Polish version of AIMS by two researchers - peadiatric physiotherapists (Rater A, Rater B).

    Intrarater and interrater reliability were examined via calculation of the intraclass correlation coefficient (ICC) and the 95% confidence interval (95%CI) of the ICC for the subscales, as well as total scores for the four studied age groups.

Secondary outcomes

  1. The study of the concurrent validity of the Polish version of the AIMS

    Time frame: 12 months

    The concurrent validity was examined by the comparison the AIMS and the Gross Motor Scales of the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales v.2, which were administered to participants at the age of 0-12 months.

    Correlations between gross motor scales of PDMS-2 and AIMS were evaluated using the Spearman rank coefficient.

Sponsors and collaborators

Lead sponsor

Poznan University of Medical Sciences

Other

Registry information

Important dates

Study start
2020
Primary completion
2021
Study completion
2021
First posted
Mar 3, 2022
Registry last updated
Mar 3, 2022

OpenTrials presents study information sourced from ClinicalTrials.gov. The official registry record should be consulted for the latest information.

View the official ClinicalTrials.gov record (opens in a new tab)

This listing is for discovery and informational purposes only. It is not medical advice, does not guarantee that a study is recruiting, and does not determine eligibility. Contact the study team and a qualified healthcare professional when considering participation.

Published trials that share one or more normalized conditions with this study.