Articles
Concurrent Validity of the Harris Infant Neuromotor Test and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pedn.2007.07.009Get rights and content

We examined concurrent validity of scores for two infant motor screening tools, the Harris Infant Neuromotor Test (HINT) and the Alberta Infant Motor Scale, in 121 Canadian infants. Relationships between the two tests for the overall sample were as follows: r = -.83 at 4 to 6.5 months (n = 121; p < .01) and r = -.85 at 10 to 12.5 months (n = 109; p < .01), suggesting that the HINT, the newer of the two measures, is valid in determining motor delays. Each test has advantages and disadvantages, and practitioners should determine which one best meets their infant assessment needs.

Section snippets

Theoretical and Research Perspectives

Early childhood intervention has been defined by Shonkoff and Meisels (2000) as multidisciplinary services provided to children from birth to 5 years of age to promote child health and well-being, enhance emerging competencies, minimize developmental delays, remediate existing or emerging disabilities, prevent functional deterioration, and promote adaptive parenting and overall family functioning. These goals are accomplished by providing individualized developmental, educational, and

Instruments Tested for Concurrent Validity

The American Academy of Pediatrics' Committee on Disabilities, in their statement on developmental surveillance and screening of infants and young children, stated that “early recognition of delays requires in-depth knowledge of the precursors to the skill as well as clinical judgment” (American Academy of Pediatrics, 2001). In other words, pediatric professionals should be cognizant of the timetables for developmental milestones to identify delayed attainment of skills as early as possible,

Methods

To examine the concurrent validity of the HINT with the AIMS, we used a comparative descriptive design to collect data on the neuromotor profiles of typical and at-risk infants. This convenience sample was composed of infants who are participating in our longitudinal investigation of neuromotor development during their first 36 months of life. Assessments in that longitudinal study occur at ages 4 to 6.5 months, 10 to 12.5 months, 2 years, and 3 years. Both the HINT and the AIMS were

Results

As is typical of longitudinal studies, we were unable to collect data for 12 infants at Time 2 (9.9% attrition from original sample). Fortunately, as seen in Table 1, there were no significant differences in the groups between Time 1 and Time 2 on any of the demographic characteristics, suggesting that the Time 2 age group is a representative subset of the earlier group. Reasons for not completing the second assessment included our inability to contact the family, missing the appropriate

Discussion

The HINT and AIMS are excellent screening tools for both hospital and community-based professionals. Widespread, community-based motor assessment can identify infants who require “watchful waiting” or referral for diagnostic assessment or specific interventions. With minimal training, the HINT and/or AIMS can be added to the “tool kits” of those nurses or other early childhood professionals who routinely see infants in their practice, contributing to the potential to improve overall health and

Acknowledgments

Funding for this study was provided by the Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council of Canada, as part of the CHILD Project for which Dr. Hillel Goelman is Principal Investigator. Dr. Jonathan Berkowitz is our statistician. We wish to thank our community partner, Dr. Dana Brynelsen, for her written input and advice on earlier drafts of this article. Also, we are very grateful to our community assessors who collected the test scores and to the infants and families who participated in our

References (43)

  • S.R. Harris et al.

    Reliability and validity of the Harris Infant Neuromotor Test

    Journal of Pediatrics

    (2001)
  • I.C. van Haastert et al.

    Early gross motor development of preterm infants according to the Alberta Infant Motor Scale

    Journal of Pediatrics

    (2006)
  • American Academy of Pediatrics

    Developmental surveillance and screening of infants and young children

    Pediatrics

    (2001)
  • V.M. Barbosa et al.

    Longitudinal performance of infants with cerebral palsy on the Test of Infant Motor Performance and on the Alberta Infant Motor Test

    Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics

    (2003)
  • D.J. Bartlett et al.

    Use of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale to characterize the motor development of infants born preterm at eight months corrected age

    Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics

    (2003)
  • N. Bayley

    Bayley scales of infant development

    (1969)
  • N. Bayley

    Bayley scales of infant development

    (1993)
  • N. Bayley

    Bayley scales of infant and toddler development

    (2006)
  • Y. Blanchard et al.

    Interrrater reliability of early intervention providers scoring the Alberta Infant Motor Scale

    Pediatric Physical Therapy

    (2004)
  • C.H. Blauw-Hospers et al.

    A systematic review of the effects of early intervention on motor development

    Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology

    (2005)
  • E.C. Cameron et al.

    The effects of an early physical therapy intervention for very preterm, very low birth weight infants: A randomized controlled clinical trial

    Pediatric Physical Therapy

    (2005)
  • S.K. Campbell et al.

    Construct validity of the Test of Infant Motor Performance

    Physical Therapy

    (1995)
  • J. Case-Smith

    Analysis of current motor development theory and recently published infant motor assessments

    Infants & Young Children

    (1996)
  • L.S. Chandler et al.

    Movement assessment of infants: A manual

    (1980)
  • W. Coster

    Critique of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS)

    Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics

    (1995)
  • L.C. Curry et al.

    Nursing assessment of families with young children: Developmental screening tools for home use

    Home Health Care Manage Practice

    (1997)
  • J. Darrah et al.

    Assessment of gross motor skills of at-risk infants: Predictive validity of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale

    Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology

    (1998)
  • S.L. Edwards et al.

    Infant and motor development

    Clinical Orthopedics & Related Research

    (2005)
  • M.R. Folio et al.

    Peabody development motor scales and activity cards: A manual

    (1983)
  • M.R. Folio et al.

    Peabody developmental motor scales examiner's manual

    (2000)
  • W.K. Frankenburg et al.

    The Denver II: A major revision and restandardization of the Denver Developmental Screening Test

    Pediatrics

    (1992)
  • View full text