Concurrent validity between instruments of assessment of motor development in infants exposed to HIV

Abstract Background Exposure to HIV during pregnancy is a risks to development. Exposed child should have assessed its development since birth. Alberta Infant Motor Scale is a tool which assess gross motor skills, with easy application and low cost. Up to now, this scale had not proven its validity for the population exposed to HIV. It’s necessary to compare its with a gold standard tool, Bayley scale, which assess gross and fine motor skills, has a high cost and longer application time required. Studies compare results of Alberta with Bayley’s total motor score (gross + fine). However, it’s also necessary to compare Alberta’s result with only Bayley’s gross motor result, because it’s what both evaluate in common. Aims to verify the concurrent validity of AIMS in infants exposed to HIV; to verify the correlation of AIMS and BSITD III for this population and to compare if these coefficients differ in the central age groups and extremities of the AIMS. Methods 82 infants exposed to HIV evaluated in 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 8th, 12th, 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th months, with Alberta Infant Motor Scale and Bayley Scale (motor subscale). For analysis of concurrent validity, results of raw scores of the scales were compared with the correlation analysis. First analysis: Alberta’s score with Bayley’s total (gross + fine) motor score. Second analysis: Alberta’s score with Bayley’s gross motor score. Results In the first correlation analysis, results were: r = 0.62 in 1 st month, r = 0.64 in 2nd month, r = 0.08 in 3rd month, r = 0.45 in 4th month; r = 0.62 in 8th month, r = 0.60 in the 12th month. In the second correlation analysis, results were: r = 0.69 in 1 st month; r = 0.58 in 2nd month; r = 0.25 in 3rd month; r = 0.45 in the 4th month; r = 0.77 in 8th month; r = 0.73 in 12th month. Analyzes of the 15th, 16th, 17th and 18th months couldn’t be performed because at these ages all the children had already reached the maximum score in the AIMS. Results were significant and indicate correlation between scales. Found results agree with other studies that found high correlations between the scales in premature and risk groups. However, these studies compare results of gross motor skills assessments with gross and fine motor skills assessments. Our results show that correlation only between the gross motor skills have higher coefficient values, and we believe this is the best way to compare the scales, with what both assessed in common. Conclusions Alberta scale has correlation with Bayley scale in assessing of children exposed to HIV, and can be a substitute to Bayley in assessing of these children. Results are stronger when comparing only what both scales assess in common.