Psychomotor development screening of children from kindergarten units of Belém, Pará, Brazil

Authors

  • Talitha Buenaño França Guerreiro Laboratório de Ecologia do desenvolvimento, Universidade Federal do Pará, Belém, PA
  • Lília Iêda Chaves Cavalcante
  • Elson Ferreira Costa
  • Mário Diego Rocha Valente Departamento de Trânsito do Estado do Pará

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.119262

Keywords:

child development, Denver II test, level of urban poverty.

Abstract

Introduction: Child development is considered a sequence of changes in behaviour and underlying processes that are infl uenced by biological and environmental factors. The screening and monitoring of neuropsychomotor development (NPMD) procedures have been shown to be effective in the early identifi cation of different diseases in childhood. Objective: relate the condition of the NPMD in children aged 36-48 months attending Early Childhood Education Units (ECEU) in Belém, Pará, Brazil to certain personal characteristics and variables of their ecological environment. Method: The following instruments were applied: Questionnaire of the biopsychosocial characteristics of the child, the Instrument for Measuring Urban Poverty Level, and fi nally, Developmental Screening Denver II Test. Result: The study revealed that of the 319 children evaluated, 77.74% had probable delays in development. The variables that were statistically significant were paternal education (0.000**), the child’s primary caregiver (0.039*) and pregnancy planning (0.007*). Regarding the instrument of measurement for the level of urban poverty, the scores ranged from 28 to 52 points, and showed a statistically significant relation with the outcome (0.003*). Conclusion: The high prevalence of probable developmental delays seen in children of the city’s ECEU showed the need to introduce early stimulation programs, encouraging the monitoring of child development through the screening, and, in addition, to alert for the issue of negative interference of socioeconomic factors related to family condition and city they reside in on child growth and development.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bronfenbrenner U. Bioecologia do desenvolvimento humano – tornando os seres humanos mais humanos. Porto Alegre: Artmed; 2011. p. 127-93.

Sigolo ARL, Aiello ALR. Análise de instrumentos para triagem do desenvolvimento infantil. Paidéia 2011;21(48): 51-60. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-863X2011000100007.

Custódio ZAO, Crepaldi MA, Cruz RM. Desenvolvimento de Crianças Nascidas Pré-Termo Avaliado pelo Teste de Denver-II: Revisão da Produção Científica Brasileira. Psicol Reflex Crit. 2012; 25(2): 400-06. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-79722012000200022

Quansah E, Ohene LA, Norman L, Mireku MO, Karikari TK. Social Factors Infl uencing Child Health in Ghana. PLoS ONE 2016; 11(1). DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0145401.

Tampubolon G. Growing Up in Poverty, Growing Old in Infi rmity: The Long Arm of Childhood Conditions in Great Britain. PLoS ONE 2015; 10 (12). DOI:10.1371/journal.pone.0144722

Zeppone SC, Volpon LC, Del Ciampo LA. Monitoramento do desenvolvimento infantil realizado no Brasil. Rev Paul Pediatr. 2012; 30(4): 594-9. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-05822012000400019

Brito CML, VIEIRA GO, Costa COM, Oliveira NF. Desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor: o teste de Denver na triagem dos atrasos cognitivos e neuromotores de pré-escolares. Cad Saúde Pública (Rio J). 2011;27(7):1403-14. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/0102-311X00104814

Dornelas LF, Duarte NMC, Magalhães LC. Atraso do desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor: mapa conceitual, definições, usos e limitações do termo. Rev Paul Pediatr. 2015; 33: 88-103. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.rpped.2014.04.009

Silva GK, Lamônica DAC. Desempenho de crianças com fenilcetonúria no Teste de Screening de Desenvolvimento Denver – II. Pro Fono. 2010; 22(1): 345-50. DOI: 10.1590/S0104-5687201000030003

Braga AKP, Rodovalho JC, Formiga CK, Martins R. Evolução do crescimento e desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor de crianças pré-escolares de zero a dois anos do município de Goiânia(GO). J Hum Growth Dev. 2011; 21(2): 230-239. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-12822011000200006

Souza SC, Leone C, Takano AO, Moratelli HB. Desenvolvimento de pré-escolares na educação infantil em Cuiabá, Mato Grosso, Brasil. Cad Saúde Pública. 2008; 24(8):1917-1926. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-311X2008000800020

Issler RMS, Giugliani ERJ. Identifi cação de grupos mais vulneráveis à desnutrição infantil pela medição do nível de pobreza. J Pediatr. 1997; 73 (2): 101-105.

Frankenburg WK, Dodds J, Archer P, Shapiro H, Bresnick B. The Denver II: a major revision and restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test. Pediatrics 1992; 89:7-91.

Caon G, Ries LGK. Suspeita de atraso no desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor em idade precoce: uma abordagem em creches públicas. Temas Sobre Desenvolvimento. 2003; 12(70): 11-17.

Santos R, Araújo A, Porto MA. Early diagnosis of abnormal development of preterm new borns: assessment instruments. J Pediatr. 2008; 84 (Supl4):289-299.DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0021-75572008000400003

Rydz D, Srour M, Oskoui M, Marget N, Shiller M, Birnbaum R, Majnemer A, Shevell M. Screening for Developmental Delay in the Setting of a Community Pediatric Clinic: A Prospective Assessment of Parent-Report Questionnaires. Pediatrics. 2006; 118(4), 1178-1186. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1542/peds.2006-0466

Hyo-yun Ga, MD, Kwon JY. A Comparison of the Korean-Ages and Stages Questionnaires and Denver Developmental Delay Screening Test. M.D. Ann Rehabil Med. 2011; 35:369-374. DOI: 10.5535/arm.2011.35.3.369

Ozmen A, Terlemez S, Tunaoglu FS, Soysal S, Pektas A, Cilsal E, Koca U, Kula S, Oguz AD. Evaluation of Neurodevelopment and Factors Affecting it in Children With Acyanotic Congenital Cardiac Disease. Iran J Pediatr. 2016; 26(1): 32-78. DOI: 10.5812/ijp.3278.

Halpern R, Barros AJD, Matijasevich A, Santos IS, Victora CG, Barros FC. Developmental status at age 12 months according to birth weight and family income: a comparison of two Brazilian birth cohorts. Cad. Saúde Pública 2008; 24(3): 444-450. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0102-311X2008001500010

Amaro LLM, Pinto SA, Morais RLS, Tolentino JA, Felício LR, Camargos ACR, et al. Child development: comparison between children who attend or do not attend public daycare centers. J Hum Growth Dev. 2015; 25(2):170-176. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.103002

Biscegli TS, Polis LB, Santos LM, Vicentin M. Avaliação do estado nutricional e do desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor em crianças frequentadoras de creche. Rev. Paul. Pediatr. 2007; 25 (4): 337-342. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0103-05822007000400007

Sabatés AL, Mendes LCO. Perfi l do crescimento e desenvolvimento de crianças entre 12 e 36 meses de idade que frequentam uma creche municipal da cidade de Guarulhos. Cienc Cuid Saude 2007; 6(2):164-170. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4025/cienccuidsaude.v6i2.4143

Amorim RCA, Laurentino GEC, Barros KMFT, Ferreira ALPR, Moura Filho AG, Raposo MCF. Programa de saúde da família: proposta para identifi cação de fatores de risco para o desenvolvimento neuropsicomotor. Rev Bras Fisioter. 2009;13(6):506-13. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1413-35552009005000065

Mengel MRSM, Linhares MBM (2007). Risk factors for infant developmental problems. Rev Latino-Am Enfermagem. 2007;15 (especial):837-42. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0104-11692007000700019

Pasian MS, Bazon MR, Pasian SR, Lacharite C. Negligência infantil a partir do Child Neglect Index aplicado no Brasil. Psicol. Refl ex. Crit. 2015; 28(1):106-115. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/1678-7153.201528112

Andraca I, Pino P, Parra AL, Rivera F, Castillo M. Factores de riesgo para el de-sarrollo psicomotor em lactantes nascidos em óptimas condiciones biológicas. Rev Saúde Pública. 1998; 32(2): 138-147. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S0034-89101998000200006

Lejarraga H, Pascuccib MC, Krupitzkya S, Kelmanskyc D, Biancoc A, Martínezc E, et al. Psychomotor development in Argentinean children aged 0–5 years. Pediatr Perinatal Epidemiol. 2002; 16: 47-60. DOI: 10.1046/j.1365-3016.2002.00388.x

Downloads

Published

2016-08-29

Issue

Vol. 26 No. 2 (2016)

Section

Artigos Originais

License

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR JOURNAL  PUBLISHERS

 

Publishers who are Committee on Publication Ethics members and who support COPE membership for journal editors should:

 

Publishers should:

 

  • Define the relationship between publisher, editor and other parties in a contract
  • Respect privacy (for example, for research participants, for authors, for peer reviewers)
  • Protect intellectual property and copyright
  • Foster editorial independence

 

Publishers should work with journal editors to:

 

  • Set journal policies appropriately and aim to meet those policies, particularly with respect to:

–         Editorial  independence

–         Research ethics, including confidentiality, consent, and the special requirements for human and animal research

–         Authorship

–         Transparency and integrity (for example, conflicts of interest, research funding, reporting standards

–         Peer review and the role of the editorial team beyond that of the journal editor

–         Appeals and complaints

  • Communicate journal policies (for example, to authors, readers, peer reviewers)
  • Review journal policies periodically, particularly with respect to new recommendations from the COPE
  • Code of Conduct for Editors and the COPE Best Practice Guidelines
  • Maintain the integrity of the academic record
  • Assist the parties (for example, institutions, grant funders, governing bodies) responsible for the investigation of suspected research and publication misconduct and, where possible, facilitate in the resolution of these cases
  • Publish corrections, clarifications, and retractions
  • Publish content on a timely basis