A comparison of Alberta’s Infant Motor Scale and Brazelton Neonatal Behavior Assessment Scale

Background and aims: The Neonatal Behavior Assessment Scale (NBAS) was introduced by Brazelton is a useful tool to assess neurodevelopment in newborn in research setting. However, it is complex, time-consuming and requires specialized training for administration and is therefore difficult tool to use in routine clinical settings. The Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) is a simple tool to assess of motor maturation of a child up to 18 months and can be administered with minimal training for the health care professionals. The study goal of this study was to evaluate the reliability and validity of the AIMS in comparison with the NBAS in assessing motor maturity at birth. Methods: We administered the AIMS and NBAS to a total of 66 newborn babies delivered in three obstetric units at the Colombo North Teaching Hospital in Ragama, Sri Lanka. The subjects were selected from a sample of 545 newborn babies in an ongoing birth-cohort study evaluating effects of prenatal exposure to biomass smoke and infant neurodevelopment. Trained research assistants administered first the NBAS, followed by the AIMS one-hour later. Univariate and bivariate statistics were used to compare the two scales. Results: Irrespective of maturity, sex, birth weight or socio-demographic characteristics, all babies had scored on the 75th percentile in the AIMS. In the NBAS, there was a significant variation in the Brazelton motor score scaled to 100. Low birth weight babies showed a narrower variation in the NABS score. None of the scales indicated a motor deficit in any of the children. Conclusion: NBAS identifies subtle differences in motor maturity of full term babies that the AIMS fails to detect.