Gross motor function and general development of babies born after assisted reproductive technology. Issue 3 (8th December 2015)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Hashimoto, Keiji; Ogawa, Kohei; Horikawa, Reiko; Ikeda, Natsuha; Kato, Keiko; Kamide, Anri; Sago, Haruhiko
• Is Part Of: Journal of obstetrics and gynaecology research. Volume 42:Issue 3(2016)
• Page Start: 266
• Page End: 272
• Publication Date: 2015-12-08
• Subjects: Ability for Basic Movement Scale for Children (ABMS‐C) -- assisted reproductive technology (ART) -- gross motor function -- Kinder Infant Development Scale (KIDS) -- questionnaire survey; Gynecology -- Periodicals; Obstetrics -- Periodicals; 618.1005
• DOI: 10.1111/jog.12898
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1341-8076

Abstract

Abstract: Aim: To elucidate the gross motor function and general development of babies born after assisted reproductive technology (ART). Material and Methods: The study subjects comprised 238 babies born after ART and 365 babies as the control. Multiple births, premature and low birth weight babies were excluded. Questionnaires were distributed to mothers and gross motor function and general development were evaluated according to the Ability for Basic Movement Scale for Children (ABMS‐C) and Kinder Infant Development Scale (KIDS), respectively. Results: There were no significant differences in gross motor function according to the ABMS‐C between the two groups at one, three, six, nine and 12 months of age. The KIDS scores on subscales of expressive language at three months, manipulation at nine months and the total developmental quotient, and subscales of manipulation, receptive language and social relationships with children at 12 months were significantly higher in the ART than in the control group. Conclusions: There was no significant difference in gross motor function up to 12 months of age between the ART and control groups. However, the total developmental quotient and scores on linguistic and communication capacity of children at 12 months of age were significantly higher in the ART group. These results suggested that ART has no adverse effects on intellectual function, at least during early infancy.