Comparação da eficácia da terapia continua e da terapia intervalada em prematuros na aquisição dos marcos motores sentar e engatinhar

Abstract

Introduction: The present study aims to evaluate the effects of an early intervention program with preterm infants without any pathology, comparing the effectiveness of the application of a continuous and interval intervention. Objective: To compare the efficacy of continuous and intermittent therapy in preterm infants in the acquisition of sit-and-crawl motors. Methods: Four infants, seven to 10 months old, all with a diagnosis of prematurity without any complications participated in the study. Initially the infants were evaluated with the AIMS (Alberta Infant Motor Scale) scales divided in two groups, the first one was submitted to continuous intervention and the other was interval, both groups totaling 24 visits. After the intervention, the infants were re-evaluated by the scales, thus comparing the scale at the first care and after the 24 treatment visits. Results: It was observed that there were significant differences (t = -10.82, p = 0.008), characterizing a great evolution in the acquisition of motor milestones, verifying that the treatment with interval care was more effective than the continuous one. Conclusion: On the basis of the results obtained, we concluded that the interval intervention was more effective, since the infants submitted to it had a significant improvement in the seated and crawling motor frames compared to those submitted to continuous intervention.