Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to demonstrate how the check sheet of the Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program^® (NIDCAP ^® ) can be quantified and used in research. Using the quantified NIDCAP ^® measures, the hypothesis that Caucasian male infants are less behaviorally competent while in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) was explored. Participants included 42 very preterm NICU infants. Eighty-five NIDCAP ^® behaviors were quantified into scores ranging from 0 to 1, indicating the percentage of time each behavior was observed. Multivariate analyses were used in grouping the 85 NIDCAP ^® behaviors into three subsystems of functioning. The hypothesis that Caucasian male infants were less competent was not supported; neither were gender differences found. Contrary to this hypothesis, African American infants were identified as more vulnerable on several behaviors. NIDCAP ^® assessments were easily quantified. Once the entire NIDCAP ^® exam has been quantified, practice applications may involve automated development of individualized care plans.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Als, H. (1984). Amanual for the naturalistic observation of the newborn (preterm and full-term). Cambridge, MA: Harvard Medical School.

Als, H. (1986). A synactive model of neonatal behavioral organization: Framework for the assessment of neurobehavioral development in the premature infant and for support of infants and parents in the neonatal intensive care environment. Physical and Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 6, 3-53.

Als, H. (1995). Revised manual for the naturalistic observation of newborn behavior: Preterm and fullterm newborns. Boston: The Children’s Hospital.

Als, H. , & Gibes, R. (1984). Neonatal individualized developmental care and assessment program. Boston: The Children’s Hospital and Brigham and Women’s Hospital.

Als, H. , Lawhon, G. , Brown, E. , Gibes, R. , Duffy, F. H. , McAnulty, G. , et al. (1986). Individualized behavioral and environmental care for the VLBW preterm infant at high risk for BPD: Neonatal intensive care unit and developmental outcome. Pediatrics, 78, 1123-1132.

Arco, C. M. , DeMeis, D.K. , Self, P. A. , & Gutrecht, N. (1984). Interrelationships among maternal and infant characteristics during the neonatal period. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 9, 131-147.

Ballard, R. A. (1998). Resuscitation in the delivery room. In H. W. Taeusch & R. A. Ballard (Eds.), Avery’s diseases of the newborn (7th ed., pp. 319-333). Philadelphia: W. B. Saunders.

Brazelton, T. B. (1973). Neonatal behavioral assessment scale. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.

Brazelton, T. B. (Ed.). (1984). Neonatal behavioral assessment scale (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott.

10.

Brazelton, T. B. , & Nugent, J. K. (1995). The Brazelton neonatal behavioral assessment scale (3rd ed.). London: Spastics International Medical Publications.

11.

Bregman, J. , & Kimberlin, L. V. (1993). Developmental outcome in extremely premature infants. Impact of surfactant. Pediatric Clinics of North America, 40, 937-953.

12.

Cook, T. D. , & Campbell, D. T. (1979). Quasi-experimentation: Design and analysis issues for field settings. Chicago: Rand McNally.

13.

Davis, M. , & Emory, E. (1995). Sex differences in neonatal stress reactivity. Child Development, 66, 14-27.

14.

Freedman, D. G. (1979). Ethnic differences in babies. Human Nature, 2(1), 36-43.

15.

Goldson, E. (1992). Follow-up of low birth weight infants: A contemporary review. In M.L. Wolraich & D.K. Routh (Eds.), Advances in developmental and behavioral pediatrics (Vol.10, pp. 159-179). London: Jessica Kingsley.

16.

Hollingshead, A. B. (1983). Two factor index of social position. In D. C. Miller (Ed.), Handbook of research design and social measurement (4th ed., pp. 300-308). Beverly Hills, CA: Sage.

17.

Horowitz, F. D. , Ashton, J. , Culp, R. , & Gaddis, E. (1977). The effects of obstetrical medication on the behavior of Israeli newborn infants and some comparisons with Uruguayan and American infants. Child Development, 48, 1607-1623.

18.

Jeremy, R. J. , & Hans, S. L. (1985). Behavior of neonates exposed in utero to methadone as assessed on the Brazelton scale. Infant Behavior and Development, 8, 323-350.

19.

Kopp, C. B. (1987). Developmental risk: Historical reflections. In J. D. Osofsky (Ed.), Handbook of infant development (2nd ed., pp. 881-912). New York: John Wiley.

20.

Lester, B. M. , Emory, E. K. , & Hoffman, S. L. (1976). A multivariate study of the effects of high-risk factors on performance on the Brazelton Neonatal Assessment Scale. Child Development, 47, 515-517.

21.

Sameroff, A. J. , Seifer, R. , & Barocas, R. (1983). Impact of parental psychopathology: Diagnosis, severity, or social status effects. Infant Mental Health Journal, 4, 236-249.

22.

Streissguth, A. P. , Barr, H. M. , & Martin, D. C. (1983). Maternal alcohol use and neonatal habituation assessed with the Brazelton scale. Child Development, 54, 1109-1118.

A Quantitative Use of the NIDCAP® Tool

Abstract

Get full access to this article

References