PEDIATRICS Vol. 66 No. 1 July 1980, pp. 83-90
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow P3Rs: Submit a response
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when P3Rs are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow E-mail this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My File Cabinet
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via CrossRef
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Leib, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Guidubaldi, J.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Leib, S. A.
Right arrow Articles by Guidubaldi, J.

Effects of Early Intervention and Stimulation on the Preterm Infant

Susan A. Leib PhD1, D. Gary Benfield MD1, and John Guidubaldi EdD1

1 Department of Pediatric Medicine, Divisions of Neonatology and Psychiatry, Children's Hospital Medical Center of Akron, Akron, Ohio; and the Department of Early Childhood Education, Kent State University, Kent, Ohio

To test the hypothesis that early intervention can enhance the development of high-risk preterm infants, a prescribed multimodal sensory enrichment program, within a regional neonatal intensive care unit, was designed and implemented. Twenty-eight appropriate-for-gestational age infants with birth weights between 1,200 and 1,800 gm were selected for study. To prevent control group contamination by the enrichment procedure, the first 14 infants were designated as the control group, and the next 14 as the treatment group. Treated infants had significantly higher developmental status than control infants, as measured by the Bayley Scales of Infant Development, at six months past the maternal expected date of confinement (F = 14.98, P < .001, and F = 16.46, P < .001 for the mental and motor scales, respectively). Mean infant weight gain per day and mean total weight gain during the hospitalization were not significantly different for the two groups although the treatment group received significantly less calories per kilogram per day than the control group (F = 9.02 P < .006). Our data suggest that a prescribed intervention program for high-risk preterm infants appears to enhance the quality of development as measured at six months past the expected date of confinement. Further studies are necessary to determine the long-term value of early intervention and the apparent ability of infants receiving an enrichment program to utilize calories more efficiently than control infants.

Submitted on May 17, 1979
Accepted on December 28, 1979




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Topics in Early Childhood Special EducationHome page
S. J. Meisels, S. N. Jones, and G. S. Stiefel
Neonatal intervention: Problem, purpose, and prospects
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, April 1, 1983; 3(1): 1 - 11.
[PDF]

Home page
 Journal of Early InterventionHome page
N. Fox and M. Lewis
Prematurity, Illness, and Experience as Factors in Preterm Development
Journal of Early Intervention, January 1, 1982; 6(1): 60 - 71.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Topics in Early Childhood Special EducationHome page
S. G. Garwood Senior Edi
From the Editor
Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, January 1, 1982; 1(4): ix - xi.
[PDF]