Aim: To examine the functional abilities of extremely low birthweight (ELBW, < or = 800 g) children at school age compared with full term children.
Methods: ELBW children (n = 115) in a geographically defined regional cohort born between 1974 and mid-1985 (comprising 96% of 120 survivors of 400 ELBW infants admitted to the Provincial Tertiary neonatal intensive care unit), were compared with (n = 50) children of comparable age and sociodemographic status. Each child was categorised by the pattern and degree of disability, using a system derived from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of the American Psychiatric Association (DSM IV). Psycho-educational, behavioural, and motor results for ELBW children free of severe/multiple neurosensory disabilities (n = 90; 91% return rate) were compared with the term children.
Results: Severe/multiple neurosensory disabilities were present in 16 ELBW children (14%), and 15 (13%) had borderline intelligence. ELBW children of global IQ > or = 85 scored significantly lower in standardised tests of fine and gross motor control, visuo-motor pencil output, visual memory, and academic achievement (reading, arithmetic, written language). ELBW survivors were three times more likely to have learning disorders (47% vs 18%) and 22 (41%) of the 54 ELBW children with learning disorders had multiple areas of learning difficulty. Of the ELBW group, 30 (26%) were not disabled compared with 41 (82%) of the term group. Only five (12%) of the ELBW boys were not disabled, compared with 25 (35%) of the ELBW girls. Finally, ELBW children had significantly worse scores on ratings of behaviour during testing by the psychologist and behaviour by parental report.
Conclusion: The most likely outcome for ELBW survivors at school age is a learning disorder, often multiple, or borderline intellectual functioning, combined with behavioural and motor risk factors rather than severe/multiple disability. Mean scores on psycho-educational testing showed poorer performance of the ELBW children, but grossly understated the complex nature of the individual degree of educational difficulty faced by these children.