Influence of type of birth on child development: a comparison by Bayley- III Scale

  • Ana Paula Magosso Cavaggioni Doutoranda pela Universidade Metodista de São Paulo – Programa de Pós- graduação em Psicologia da Saúde – São Bernardo do Campo - SP
  • Maria do Carmo Fernandes Martins Profa. Dra. Programa de Pós-graduação em Psicologia da Saúde da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo – São Bernardo do Campo/SP
  • Miria Benincasa Profa. Dra. Programa de Pós-graduação em Psicologia da Saúde da Universidade Metodista de São Paulo – São Bernardo do Campo/SP
Keywords: Child development, Cesarean section, Normal birth, Bayley-III, Prematurity

Abstract

Introduction: Elective cesarean section is associated with several damages to the newborn's health, such as respiratory and gastrointestinal problems and diabetes that  last throughout life. However, few studies discuss aspects related to psychological development.

Objective: To investigate the development of Brazilian children according to the type of birth and gestational age in the cognitive, language, motor, socio-emotional and adaptive behavior domains.

Methods: This is an exploratory and descriptive cross-sectional study conducted in the city of São Bernardo de Campo, São Paulo, Brazil, between June 2016 and March 2017. The final sample consisted of 263 children up to 42 months of age. For data collection were applied a socio demographic questionnaire and the Bayley-III Scale. The statistical analysis was  based on  both a  North American reference sample  and a local  sample using   the SPSS version 21, through  Pearson's Chi-square statistical test and  significance criteria p <0.05.

Results: A significant difference (p<0.005) was observed, with a higher risk of problems in fine motor development and expressive language in children born at pre-term between 37- 39 weeks compared to those born at term between  39 - 41 weeks. Significant difference (p<0.005) was also observed in sensory processing and adaptive behavior, with greater impairment  in children born via elective cesarean section compared to those born vaginally.

Conclusion: Despite its limitations and discrepancies, this research indicates potential impairments in the psychological development of children born at early term via elective cesarean.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

1. Organização Mundial da Saúde (OMS). Declaração da OMS sobre Taxas de Cesáreas [internet] 2015. [cited 2020 Jun 11] Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/161442/ WHO_RHR_ 15.02_por.pdf?sequence=3

2. Fundação Osvaldo Cruz (FIOCRUZ). Nascer no Brasil: inquérito nacional sobre parto e nascimento. [cited 2020 Jun 11] Available from: http://www.ensp.fiocruz.br/portal-ensp/informe/site/arquivos/anexos/ nascerweb. pdf.

3. Teitler JO, Hegyi T, Plaza R, Kruse L, Reichman NE. Elective deliveries and neonatal outcomes in full-term pregnancies. Am J Epidemiol. 2019;188(4):674-83. DOI: http://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwz014

4. Ferraro AA, Barbieri MA, Silva AAM, Goldani MZ, Fernandes MTB, Cardoso VC, et aI. Cesarean Delivery and Hypertension in Early Adulthood. Am J Epidemiol. 2019;188(7):12-96-1303. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/aje/kwz096

5. Conselho Federal de Medicina (CFM). Resolução CFM Nº 2.144/2016. [cited 2020 Jun 11] Available from: https://portal.cfm.org.br/images/stories/pdf/res21442016.pdf.

6. Lino HCL, Diniz SG. “You Take Care of the Baby’s Clothes and I Take Care of the Delivery” - Communication between Professionals and Patients and Decisions about the Mode of Delivery in the Private Sector in São Paulo, Brazil. J Hum Growth Dev. 2015;25(1):117-24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.96825

7. Sameroff A. A Unified Theory of Development: a Dialectic Integration of Nature and Nurture. Child Dev. 2010;81(1):6-22. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8624.2009.01378.x

8. RobsonSJ, Vally H, Abdel-Latif ME, Yu M, Westrupp E. Childhood Health and Developmental Outcomes After Cesarean Birth in an Australian Cohort. Pediatrics. 2015;136(5):e1285-93. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2015-1400

9. Chojnacki MR, Holscher HD, Balbinot AR, Raine LB, Biggan JR, Walk AM, et al. Relations between mode of birth delivery and timing of developmental milestones and adiposity in preadolescence: A retrospective study. Early Hum Dev. 2019;129;52-9. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2018.12.021

10. Severiano AAO, Dantas DS, Oliveira VLC, Lopes JM, Souza DS, Magalhães AG. Association between breastfeeding, obstetric factors and child development in northeast Brazil. J Hum Growth Dev. 2017;27(2):158-65. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.7322/jhgd.114483

11. Rodrigues SML, Silva PMM. O impacto do parto eutócico versus cesariana eletiva no desenvolvimento de competências da criança. Rev Enf Refer. 2018; 4(16):107-16. DOI: https://doi.org/10.12707/RIV17056

12. Bayley N. Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development. Third Edition: San Antonio, TX: Pearson, 2006.

12. American Educational Research Association (AERA). American Psychological Association (APA). National Council on Measurement in Education (NCME). Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington: 2009.

13. Ronfani L, Vecchi BL, Mariuz M, Tognin V, Bin M, Ferluga V, et al. The Complex Interaction between Home Environment, Socioeconomic Status, Maternal IQ and Early Child Neurocognitive Development: A Multivariate Analysis of Data Collected in a Newborn Cohort Study. PLoS One; 2015;10(5): e012705. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0127052

14. Hanlon C, Medhin G, Worku B, Tomlinson M, Alern A, Dewey M, et al. Adapting the Bayley Scales of Infant and Toddler Development in Ethiopia: Evaluation of Reliability and Validity. Child Care Health Dev. 2016;42(5):699-708. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.12371

15. Steenis LJP, Verhoeven M, Hessen D, van Baar AL. Performane of dutch children on the Bayley-III: a comparison study of US and Dutch Norms. Plos One. 2015;10(8), e0132871. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0132871

16. Momo ARB, Graciani CSZ. Atividades Sensoriais: na clínica, na escola, em casa. São Paulo: Memnon Edições Cientificas, 2012; p. 23-36.

17. Liddle TL, Yorke L. Coordenação motora. São Paulo: MBoooks do Brasil, 2007; p. 36-56.

18. Pekçetin S, Sar?das B, Üstünyurt Z, Kay?han H. Sensory-Processing Patterns of Preterm Children at 6 Years of Age. Infants Young Children. 2019;32(1):33-42. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1097/iyc.0000000000000131

19. Bart O, Shayevits S, Gabis LV, Morag I. Prediction of participation and sensory modulation of late preterm infants at 12 months: A prospective study. Res Dev Disabil. 2011;32(6):2732-8. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ridd.2011.05.037

20. Shimizu VT, Miranda MC. Processamento sensorial na criança com TDAH: uma revisão da literatura. Rev Psicopedag. 2012;29(89):256-68.

21. Al Khalaf SY, O’Neill SM, O’Keeffe LM, Henriksen TB, Kenny LC, Cryan JF, et al. The impact of obstetric mode of delivery on childhood behavior. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol. 2015;50(10):1557-67. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1055-9

22. Krogh MT, Vaever MS, Harder S, Koppe S. Cultural differences in infant development during the first year: A study of Danish infants assessed by the Bayley-III and compared to the American norms. Eur J Dev Psychol. 2012; 9(6):730-736. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/17405629.2012.688101

23. Rabie NZ, Bird TM, Magann EF, Hall RW, McKelvey SS. ADHD and developmental speech/language disorders in late preterm, early term and term infants. J Perinatol. 2015;35(8):660-4. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/jp.2015.28
Published
2020-06-17
Section
ORIGINAL ARTICLES