Fisioterapia en La UCI Neonatal

Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 33(1):75–110, 2013

C 2013 by Informa Healthcare USA, Inc.
Available online at http://informahealthcare.com/potp
DOI: 10.3109/01942638.2012.750870
Physical Therapy Intervention in the Neonatal

Intensive Care Unit
Eilish Byrne1 & June Garber2,3

Phys Occup Ther Pediatr Downloaded from informahealthcare.com by University of Toronto on 06/01/13
1
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, Palo Alto, CA, USA,
2
Neonatal Special Care Nurseries, Emory University Hospital Midtown and Grady
Memorial Hospital, Atlanta, GA, USA, 3 Division of Physical Therapy, School of
Medicine, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA
ABSTRACT. This article presents the elements of the Intervention section of the In-
fant Care Path for Physical Therapy in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU). The
types of physical therapy interventions presented in this path are evidence-based and
the suggested timing of these interventions is primarily based on practice knowledge
For personal use only.
from expert therapists, with supporting evidence cited. Physical therapy intervention in
the NICU is infant-driven and focuses on providing family-centered care. In this con-
text, interventions to facilitate a calm behavioral state and motor organization in the
infant, address positioning and handling of the infant, and provide movement therapy
are presented.
KEYWORDS. Physical Therapy, Neonatal, Intervention, Therapy, NICU
This article describes the physical therapy interventions included in the Infant Care
Path for Physical Therapy in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) (Figure 1,
Campbell, 2013). The types of physical therapy interventions included in the In-
fant Care Path for Physical Therapy in the NICU are evidence-based. The sug-
gested timing of these interventions was primarily driven by practice knowledge,
with evidence regarding timing cited as available. The suggested time line for inter-
ventions was developed with input from five expert therapists across the country,
allowing for regional representation regarding neonatal physical therapy practice.
For a more thorough discussion of the development and use of care paths in gen-
eral, please refer to the article entitled “Use of a Care Path” (Campbell, 2013). This
article will present interventions for facilitating a calm state and motor organiza-
tion, positioning and handling of the infant, and providing movement therapy. The
context for providing these interventions includes a developmentally appropriate,
family-centered approach to care where environmental challenges are considered.
Address correspondence to: Eilish Byrne, Neonatal Intensive Care Unit, Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital,
Stanford University, 725 Welch Road, Rehabilitation Services – 3rd Floor, Palo Alto, California 94304, USA
(E-mail: ebyrne@lpch.org).
(Received 15 September 2011; revised 27 August 2012; accepted 21 September 2012)
75
76 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 1. Infant Care Path for Physical Therapy in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.
Source: Campbell (2013).
This article begins with a discussion regarding the contexts in which the interven-
tions occur.
INFANT-DRIVEN, FAMILY-CENTERED APPROACH

Providing developmentally appropriate care to infants and families in the NICU
requires a dynamic, continuous approach to intervention. Relationship-based (in-
fant driven), family-centered caregiving is a critical element of developmental care
Physical Therapy Intervention In Neonatal Intensive Care Unit 77
FIGURE 1. (Continued)
(Bowden, Greenberg, & Donaldson, 2000; Gale & Franck, 1998). Physical thera-
pists in the NICU promote developmental relationship-based care of the infant.
To accomplish this, the physical therapist provides interventions to facilitate infant
development while collaborating with the parents to support their needs to engage
with and parent their infant.
78 Byrne and Garber
Providing and modeling relationship-based care of the infant requires that the
physical therapist not only recognize, but also respond appropriately, to infant be-
havioral cues (Als et al., 2003). It is through responding appropriately to infant cues
during care that development of behaviorally beneficial neuronal pathways is sup-
ported in the infant through modulation of the infant’s neurobehavior (Als et al.,
2004). A useful model of infant behavior to guide physical therapy care in the NICU
is the synactive model of infant development (Als, 1982) in which interdependent
behavioral dimensions are organized as subsystems and affect infant neurobehav-
ior. These subsystems include the autonomic system, the motor system, the state
organizational system, the attentional-interactive system, and the self-regulatory
system. In using this model, the physical therapist observes whether the five sub-
systems are working well together to provide the infant with physiologic stability
and the ability to engage in social interactions. If the physical therapist recognizes
that the infant is communicating signs of stress, the appropriate response is to iden-
tify the stressor and eliminate it if possible.
The Newborn Individualized Developmental Care and Assessment Program
(Als, 1982) is a developmental care framework that can be used in the NICU set-
ting to help guide caregiver–infant interactions. For instance, the physical therapist
should schedule sessions at a time that is most appropriate for the infant and fam-
ily, as well as in conjunction with the bedside nurse’s schedule for routine care and
feeding. Typically, services are delivered prior to a scheduled feeding. Respecting
an infant’s right to sleep (and need for recovery from handling) is an important
aspect of providing developmentally focused care. Deep sleep is important for the
development of the neurosensory system and the maturing brain (McGrath, 2007).
Some research findings have been supportive of this model of health care delivery.
In a study examining outcomes of infants born preterm receiving an individualized
developmental care and assessment program, Peters et al. (2009) found significantly
improved short- and long-term function, reduced length of stay, reduced incidence
of chronic lung disease (CLD), and decreased mental delays at 18 months corrected
age (CA).
There are many factors in the NICU environment that challenge not only the
neurodevelopment of the infant but also the development of the parent–infant re-
lationship. In the NICU, the infant is exposed to fluctuations in noise levels, temper-
ature, light, and schedules of evaluation and care. The infant may endure noxious
stimuli, painful procedures, pharmacologic agents, and too much handling at times.
Risk for infection can be high, threatening the health of the infant. It is under these
circumstances, too, that family bonding can be threatened. During the crisis of hav-
ing an infant hospitalized in the NICU, parents may experience feelings of anxiety,
helplessness, loss of control, fear, uncertainty, and worry (Miles & Holditch-Davis,
1997). These feelings can impact the parent–infant interaction.
A physical therapist provides relationship-based care to the family by fostering
the parent–infant relationship. One model for doing this is the hope-empowerment
model (Sweeney & Swanson, 2001) by which the physical therapist builds a ther-
apeutic partnership through collaboration with the parent to assist with coping
and foster empowerment. In addition to addressing the physical therapy needs of
the infant, physical therapists have a unique opportunity to collaborate with par-
ents through instruction and guidance regarding infant handling and positioning,
appropriate developmental activities (e.g., tummy time for play, reaching activi-
ties), and recognition of infant cues and behavior. Instructing parents on how to
safely handle and position their young infants with skill and confidence is a role of
the physical therapist in the NICU (Sweeney, Heriza, & Blanchard, 2009). Learning
and practicing these skills with a physical therapist may increase a parent’s ability
to participate in infant care, and proponents of family-centered care advocate that
appropriate parental involvement will benefit the current and future health of the
infant (Gale & Franck, 1998).
Physical therapists provide family-centered care by understanding how comfort-
able the parents are regarding participation in their infant’s care. A model to assess
this defines four levels of participation (Karen I. Wayman, personal communica-
tion, October 2010). Level 1 is a medical approach in which information is provided

to the family. Level 2 is a family support approach in which the family may be of-
fered individual or group support for coping and decision making. Level 3 is family
involvement and partnership in care, and Level 4 is family efficacy. Achieving family
efficacy implies that there is a shared decision-making process in the care of the in-
fant. Other components of the therapist–parent relationship to address when deliv-
ering family-centered care include respect, collaboration, and support (Hutchfield,
1999). For a more detailed discussion of family-centered care and the parent–infant
and parent–therapist relationships, please see the article entitled “Family Support
and Education” (Goldstein, 2013).
ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS
The environment of the NICU is not inherently conducive to neonatal growth
and development. In fact, excessive environmental stimuli experienced by the
preterm neonate may contribute to developmental concerns that emerge at school
age (Perlman, 2001). Primary environmental considerations include facilitating
neonatal temperature regulation, modifying environmental lighting, and limiting
noise levels. In most nurseries, neonatal temperature regulation is maintained
through the use of an incubator (isolette). Temperature regulation contributes to
neonatal physiologic stability and energy conservation. To promote temperature
stability, the incubator thermostat is set to provide the heat needed to help the
neonate maintain a minimum temperature of 36.5◦ C. When providing physical
therapy in the NICU, it is important to know that the infant’s temperature is within
appropriate limits prior to removing the infant from the incubator or removing
infant clothing and to assess the effects of handling on infant thermal stability.
Lighting in a NICU is bright compared to the darkness of the intrauterine envi-
ronment; the infant rarely experiences total darkness. In fact, the infant will likely
experience exceptionally bright overhead lights during a variety of medical proce-
dures. Although bright lights may be needed for certain medical procedures, the
infant born preterm is unable to independently modulate this experience. The use
of cycled lighting in a NICU to facilitate the development of the neonatal circadian
clock (Rivkees, Mayes, Jacobs, & Gross, 2004) and to promote weight gain for low
birth weight infants (Jung, 2005) has been advocated, although research is not con-
clusive. When removing the infant from an isolette for developmental stimulation,
the physical therapist should be careful to keep the infant comfortable and, when
80 Byrne and Garber
possible, the environment should be modified to facilitate infant success at a par-

ticular developmental task (e.g., dim the lights when facilitating visual interaction).
Modulating the noise in a NICU is important for promoting optimal neonatal
development. High noise levels may contribute to neonatal physiologic stress. Stim-
ulation from alarms and other external noises can produce neonatal autonomic
responses, compromising physiologic stability (Bremmer, Byers, & Kiehl, 2003).
Short-term physiologic responses to elevated noise levels may include changes in
heart and respiratory rates (Wharrad & Davis, 1997). These short-term changes may
utilize more energy, limiting the capacity for growth and healing (Brown, 2009). In
addition to the short-term effects of elevated noise, some researchers express con-
cern that prolonged exposure to uninterrupted noise in the NICU may contribute
to long-term hearing deficits (Brown, 2009; Levy, Woolston, & Browne, 2003).
Some ways to curb unnecessary noise in a NICU include instituting “quiet times,”
closing incubator portals quietly, avoiding tapping on incubators, lowering your
speaking voice and limiting bedside conversation, eliminating unnecessary over-
head paging, silencing alarms when able to, and installing sound-absorbing flooring
and fixtures or sound-activated signaling systems to indicate the need to reduce
sound levels. For the physical therapist, targeting unit “quiet times” to work with
the neonate outside of the incubator may foster neonatal self-regulation.
FACILITATE CALM STATE AND MOTOR ORGANIZATION

The first item addressed in the Intervention section of the Infant Care Path for
Physical Therapy in the NICU (Campbell, 2013) is behavioral state regulation and
the interventions to facilitate a calm state and motor organization, including non-
nutritive sucking (NNS), containment, and positioning (including hydrotherapy
and “skin-to-skin care”; SSC) (Figure 2). Noxious sensory inputs that an infant born
preterm experiences in the NICU negatively affect the neuronal organization that
normally occurs in the last trimester of pregnancy (Als et al., 2004). Noise, bright
lighting, and touch can cause physiologic instability and stress and adversely affect
development of the preterm infant (Als et al., 1994; Anand & Scalzo, 2000). For
the infant born preterm, physiologic stability (e.g., heart rate of 120 to 180 beats
per minute, oxygen saturation approaching 100%, and respiratory rate of 20 to 50
breaths per minute) enables quiet alert states and behavioral organization for social
interaction and functional motor patterns (e.g., hands to midline). It is important
to note that signs of physiologic stability should be evaluated within the context of
the neonate’s day and individual medical status. Techniques that help the neonate
to maintain physiologic stability decrease attention difficulties in infancy (Buehler,
Als, Duffy, McAnulty, & Liederman, 1995). Based on documentation of an infant’s
competencies and needs, a variety of techniques can be used to help an infant find
a calm, quiet, and organized state. These include sucking, contained and supportive
touch, positioning to foster flexion, midline placement of the infant’s extremities,
and using slow transitional movements (Als et al., 1994; Buehler et al., 1995).
Non-Nutritive Sucking (NNS)

Non-nutritive sucking includes placement of an appropriately sized pacifier or a
caregiver’s gloved finger within the infant’s mouth to elicit at least some degree
FIGURE 2. Facilitate Calm State and Motor Organization, Intervention section of the Infant
Care Path for Physical Therapy in the NICU. Source: Campbell (2013).
of sucking effort, with minimal fluid other than oral secretions to control. As an
intervention method for fragile preterm infants, NNS is initially elicited while the
relatively alert infant remains in an isolette in prone or sidelying prior to or during

gavage feeding. Within an infant’s tolerance of handling and ability to maintain
temperature stability, NNS can be facilitated while that infant is held by a parent
during a gavage feeding or at the mother’s emptied breast during “kangaroo care”
or “SSC” (Kirk, Alder, & King, 2007).
The NNS experience benefits a preterm infant in multiple ways. Infant’s re-
sponses to this oral experience reflect their degree of fatigue as well as their neuro-
motor maturity. Among infants less than 33–34 weeks postmenstrual age (PMA),
NNS consists of short bursts of licking and usually leads to restful sleep periods.
Among more mature preterm infants, NNS is a more complex motor pattern that
not only helps them calm to sleep when tired but also helps them achieve periods
of quiet alertness. For parents providing NNS, these positive responses from their
infants contribute significantly to early relationship building and their sense of com-
petence as parents. In preparation for the demands of oral feeding, NNS experience
can improve the strength and control of oral musculature as well as improve the in-
fant’s rooting or oral orientation responses (Boiron, Da Nobrega, Roux, Henrot, &
Saliba, 2007). These topics are discussed in more detail in the article entitled “Oral
Motor Function and Feeding Intervention” (Garber, 2013).
Containment
Containment and touch also facilitate self-regulation in the neonate. When applied
by caregivers, facilitated tucking (where the infant is held in a sidelying fetal posi-
tion by the parent) was equal to or better than other pain management techniques
after uncomfortable procedures such as heel stick or pharyngeal suctioning (Axelin,
Salantera, Kirjavainen, & Lehtonen, 2009). Contained touch in the NICU typically
involves placing a firm (not too soft, not too hard) hand on the neonate at the top
of the head and over the trunk and hip area to flex the hips, thereby “containing”
the infant. It is thought to be most effective for infant calming when the caregiver’s
hands are still and not moving. This technique can be performed as tolerated until
the infant is calm/relaxed or sleeping.
Swaddling, a containment positioning technique that facilitates flexion, can fos-
ter self-regulation of the infant (Neu & Browne, 1997). Swaddling typically involves
wrapping a blanket around the infant in such a way as to help the infant maintain
gentle flexion of the legs and arms without eliminating small arcs of spontaneous
movement. Swaddling provides support through the infant’s trunk and therefore is
a useful positioning technique for breast and bottle feeding, for transitions in and
82 Byrne and Garber
out of bed, and for periods of interaction with parents. In a study by Franco et al.
(2005), term infants in supine had better sustained sleep and reduced spontaneous
awakenings during non-rapid eye movement sleep. In addition, the infants slept
longer and spent more time in non-rapid eye movement sleep. Swaddling in side-
lying and supine was also found to facilitate neuromuscular development (Short,
Brooks-Brunn, Reeves, Yeager, & Thorpe, 1996).
Prone and sidelying positions can also provide containment. Among fragile in-
fants less than 32 weeks PMA, placing infants in these positions inside an isolette
or on a caregiver’s chest has been shown to facilitate extremity flexion toward the
midline, limit uncontrolled flailing extremity movement, and encourage more sta-
ble vital signs (Axelin et al., 2009; Heimler, Langlois, Hodel, Nelin, & Sasidharan,
1992). In addition, when compared to supine, the prone and left sidelying positions
decreased the occurrence of reflux from gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD)
in these infants (Corvaglia et al., 2007). Utilizing prone and sidelying positions al-
lows infants born preterm to recover from stressful events and calm to sleep bet-
ter than in a supine position while being monitored (not appropriate for home).
Among more vigorous preterm infants 32–34 weeks PMA, the prone and sidelying
positions can also extend the duration and improve the quality of emerging inter-
active responses.
Sidelying also may facilitate chin tucking for the development of head control
and arm and hand movements for hand to mouth/face play and hand to body play,
activities that are self-regulatory behaviors (Grenier, Bigsby, Vergara, & Lester,
2003). Likewise, placing neonates in the sidelying position may foster motor orga-
nization as demonstrated by more coordinated spontaneous midline movements
(Nakano et al., 2004). The supine position has been generally seen as less support-
ive to the preterm infant’s state regulation and comfort. However, when the goal is
to vary the infant’s positioning experience and promote musculoskeletal integrity
in supine or when the supine position is preferred medically, using a developmen-
tal nest may contribute to better coordinated, midline-oriented movements of the
upper and lower extremities (Ferrari et al., 2007).
Skin-to-Skin Care (SSC)

Skin-to-skin care is a positioning technique with particular benefits to the infant
and parents. The diapered-only infant is nestled under the parent’s shirt directly
against the skin and then a blanket is placed over the infant and parent. When
implemented correctly, this position promotes soft flexion of the infant’s arms,
legs, trunk, and neck. The immediate benefits for self-regulation may include tem-
perature regulation, improved oxygen saturation, and decreased respiratory rate
(Fohe, Kropf, & Avenarius, 2000). With support and instruction, parents learn to
relax with their infant snuggled in this manner; they learn to provide appropriately
low levels of stimulation; and they feel valued as providers of this important inter-
vention. SSC is associated with decreased length of hospital stay, improved weight
gain, and increased frequency of breast feedings at discharge (Bier et al., 1996;
Wahlberg, Affonso, & Persson, 1992). In addition, Bier et al. (1996) found that, out
of a group of mothers who intended to breast feed their infants, significantly more
mothers who performed SCC compared to standard holding (clothed and blan-
keted infant) were still breast feeding after one month post-discharge. Regarding
infant development and maternal health, Feldman, Eidelman, Sirota, and Weller
(2002) found that infants who received frequent SSC from their mothers had a
better developmental outcome at six months CA and mothers were less depressed.
Hydrotherapy
Hydrotherapy with a swaddled infant may be a useful adjunct intervention for
facilitating self-regulation. Benefits of hydrotherapy in other patient populations
(adults) may include relaxation, decreased pain, improved perceived quality of life
(Tinti, Somera, Valente, & Domingos, 2010), and increased cardiorespiratory and
renal functions (Pechter, Maaroos, Mesikepp, Veraksits, & Ots, 2003a; Pechter et al.,
2003b). Neonates have demonstrated physiological tolerance of hydrotherapy pro-

vided by a physical therapist (Sweeney, 1983). In addition, infants 32–36 weeks
PMA who received swaddled hydrotherapy (for details on the swaddled emersion
protocol, please refer to the article) prior to feeding demonstrated improved feed-
ing efficiency (Sweeney, 2003).
The Infant Care Path for Physical Therapy in the NICU (Campbell, 2013)
indicates that techniques for facilitating a calm state and motor organization
are appropriate throughout the NICU stay, but should be adapted appropri-
ately as the infant develops, the infant–parent relationship grows, and discharge
approaches.
POSITIONING AND HANDLING

The second item addressed in the Intervention section of the Infant Care Path for
Physical Therapy in the NICU (Campbell, 2013) is positioning and handling (Fig-
ure 3). Specific topic areas in this section include preserving musculoskeletal in-
tegrity, and promoting comfort, respiratory function, skin integrity and contained
movement, splinting, range of motion, and infant alerting. The musculoskeletal sys-
tem of infants born preterm is vulnerable to the effects of gravity, poor handling
(not properly supporting the infant) and positioning, and the restrictions caused
by necessary medical equipment such as boards to hold intravenous lines in place.
Physical therapists have an important role in ameliorating some of the potentially
deleterious effects of these experiences. Because infants born prior to 31 weeks
gestational age (GA) have immature muscle fibers and neuromuscular junctions
(Lowes, Sveda, Gajdosik, & Gajdosik, 2012) and diminished flexor tone (Grant
Beuttler & Shewokis, 2007), developmentally supportive positioning is important.
Allen and Capute (1990) described tone development in the infant born preterm
to be caudo-cephalad, beginning at about 33–35 weeks PMA in the lower extrem-
ities and 35–37 weeks PMA in the upper extremities. The physical therapist needs
to position the infant in a manner that facilitates this developmental progression.
Sweeney and Gutierrez (2002) suggest that the neck, shoulders, hips, and feet are
particularly vulnerable to the effects of poor positioning and infants born preterm
may experience neck hyperextension, shoulder retraction, external rotation of the
hips, and foot eversion when positioned in supine or in prone (without appropriate
developmental rolls).
84 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 3. Positioning and Handling, Intervention section of the Infant Care Path for
Physical Therapy in the NICU. Source: Campbell (2013).
Head Shaping and Musculoskeletal Integrity

Varying the position of the infant is important for maintaining musculoskeletal
integrity and avoiding contracture and deformity including acquired torticollis
(Sweeney & Gutierrez, 2002; Vaivre-Douret, Ennouri, Jrad, Garrec, & Papiernik,
2004), assisting with skull shaping (Najarian, 1999; Neufeld & Birkett, 2000; van
Vlimmeren et al., 2008), and providing varied visual stimulation. Varying the in-
fant’s position refers to placing the infant in prone, sidelying, supine, and supported
upright regularly throughout the day (ideally) or over the course of a few days.
When placing the infant in any of these positions, the physical therapist should take
care to facilitate neutral alignment of joints, support the head and spinal curves, and
encourage midline orientation of extremities and opportunities to appropriately vi-
sually interact with the environment.
A case report by McManus and Capistran (2008) illustrates a positioning pro-
gram implemented in the NICU to promote head shaping of an infant born preterm
with dolichocephaly. Dolichocephaly, which is a head with narrow width and long
anterior-posterior cranial distance, is commonly seen in infants born preterm. It is
important to address in the NICU because it often persists after discharge and may
require substantial physical therapy intervention. In this case report, the infant was
placed on a viscoelastic mattress with a developmental care program in place. Cra-
nial molding was measured using the cranial index, a ratio of width to length. After
implementing a positioning program to foster midline head position, the cranial in-
dex measurements improved to within normal limits. This effect was maintained
at the time of discharge. This case highlights how a physical therapist can prevent
musculoskeletal impairment of preterm infants in the NICU.
Promote Comfort and Respiratory Function

Placing infants in certain positions can promote self-regulation and physiologic
stability. SSC promotes autonomic regulation (as previously described) and im-
proved oxygenation in infants born early (Cleary, Spinner, Gibson, & Greenspan,
1997). Likewise, compared to the supine position, the prone position is associated
with decreased central apnea and periodic breathing (Heimler et al., 1992) and is
also therefore considered to promote stability in neonatal respiration (Levy et al.,
2006). Levy and colleagues (2006) also noted that prone positioning among healthy
preterm infants approaching discharge no longer provided a pulmonary advantage
over supine. As reflected in the NICU Care Path at 34 weeks PMA, infants with-
out gastroesophageal reflux and/or chronic pulmonary insufficiency can begin the
transition to increased supine sleeping time. The prone position is also considered
to promote general infant comfort, as infants typically “settle” in this position. In
addition, as previously mentioned, sidelying flexion helps infants calm after painful
procedures (Axelin et al., 2009).
Promote Skin Integrity and Provide Scar Management

Promoting the skin integrity of the neonate is a role for the physical therapist in the
NICU. Healthy skin requires nutrition and oxygen-rich blood. Physical therapists
can intervene in ways that facilitate the flow of blood to areas of skin at risk for com-
pression due to body position and gravity. Interventions performed by the physical
therapist may include facilitated or passive movement of limbs, positioning changes
of head/neck, trunk, or limbs, and use of pressure-relieving aides as appropriate.
In a study by Marcellus (2004), the bodily area experiencing the greatest amount
of pressure in supine, prone, and sidelying was the head (in all three positions),
followed closely by the knee in prone and shoulder in sidelying. Special attention
to these areas during developmental positioning is warranted, as the skin of the
infant born preterm is more prone to dryness and injury. In addition, the results
by Marcellus (2004) emphasize the importance of promoting a variety of well-
tolerated positions to be used throughout the day within the context of a devel-
opmental program.
Scar management as a component of promoting skin integrity can be a role for
the physical therapist in the NICU, but the evidence supporting the best method
for this intervention is mixed. Part of what makes evaluating the evidence for scar
management difficult is the variety of techniques studied (e.g., silicone gel, silicone
gel sheeting, topical medicines, scar massage), the differences in the types of injury
studied (e.g., trauma, burns, medical burns), the differences in the age of the skin
injury (recent skin injury or old skin injury), and the variety in patient age from
newborn to elderly. Due to the heterogeneity of studies, a best method for injury
characteristics and patient age has not been established.
A Cochrane review to assess the efficacy of using silicone gel sheeting to treat
and prevent scarring in other patient populations (O’Brien & Pandit, 2006) found
that most clinical trials were (1) small, (2) of poor quality, and (3) highly suscep-
tible to bias. Since this review, a variety of studies have shown benefits to using
a variety of treatment methods including, silicone gel sheeting (Karagoz, Yuksel,
Ulkur, & Evinc, 2009; Sakuraba, Takahashi, Akahoshi, Miyasaka, & Suzuki, 2011;
Wigger-Albert et al., 2009), topical silicone gel (Karagoz et al., 2009), pressure gar-
ments (Engrav et al., 2010), and a combination of these therapies (Li-Tsang, Zheng,
& Lau, 2010). As no single best method for scar management has been identified,
the therapist will need to collaborate with the health care team in identifying the
best intervention for a particular patient situation in the NICU and should be
vigilant in following the literature to identify the most appropriate evidence-based
strategies.
86 Byrne and Garber
Promote Contained Movement

The promotion of contained movement is another component of developmentally
appropriate positioning and handling of preterm infants with limited endurance and
immature capacity to control more complex antigravity movement. This interven-
tion differs from the previously discussed calming measure referred to as contain-
ment. Contained movement refers to free movement with boundaries that typically
limit the motion within mid-range for protection and support. Regardless of age,
most medically fragile infants with limited tolerance of handling can benefit from
promotion of contained movement during their positioning and routine care. The
cycles of active movement that are typically evident to mothers during their third
trimester of pregnancy play an important role in fetal musculoskeletal and nervous

system development. Fetal ultrasound images during the third trimester of preg-
nancy confirm that movements are typically vigorous, complex, and variable while
being limited in range by the uterine wall. The rationale for promotion of contained
movement is provision of a similar though diminished developmentally significant
experience. Using the qualitative assessment of General Movements developed by
Prechtl and colleagues, a variety of smooth, multi-directional fetal movements of
the head, trunk, and extremities were observed in utero as well as among infants
born preterm as young as 24 weeks PMA (de Vries & Bos, 2010; Prechtl, 1990).
The uterine wall not only limits the arcs of extremity movements, but also facili-
tates flexed resting postures between cycles of fetal movement.
When prematurely born infants are at rest and not being disturbed by caregivers,
nested bedding is the primary uterine wall substitute for support of flexed postures,
midline orientation, and limitation of extremity movement. A study comparing
the posture and movement responses of preterm infants demonstrated benefits of
nested support (Ferrari et al., 2007). The positioning method used by Ferrari et al.
(2007) consisted of a relatively deep oval nest completely surrounding the infant
from head to toe with space for movement while supine. The authors concluded
that when “nested,” infants not only maintained resting postures with greater ex-
tremity flexion, but also initiated spontaneous movements with more midline orien-
tation and isolated distal components as well as initiated fewer abrupt or end range
extremity extension movements. The primary effect among 30–33 weeks PMA in-
fants supported by nested bedding was increased extremity movements toward the
midline and isolated distal movements of the wrists. Among infants 34–36 weeks
PMA, abrupt, spontaneous startle movements were significantly decreased as an
additional benefit. A finding specific to infants at 37–40 weeks PMA was resting
postures before and after spontaneous movement that included increased shoulder
adduction and head alignment in midline.
During routine care of preterm infants <35 weeks PMA, several rest periods with
containment measures provided by the hands of a caregiver are typically needed for
calming while vital signs return to baseline levels. Smooth, small-arc movements of
extremities toward the midline and active trunk flexion signal not only a preterm
infant’s recovery from the stress of routine care measures but also a drive to move
and enjoyment of controlled movement. When these behaviors are observed, brief
uninterrupted periods to engage the infant in free but contained movement can be
of benefit. For example, an infant supported in a flexed sidelying position with a
surface against which to kick (adult’s hand) can experience variable, smooth move-
ment typical of <35 weeks PMA infants. By modeling this technique, a therapist
introduces caregivers to options other than swaddling that may significantly limit
developmentally important extremity movement.
Provide Gentle Range of Motion as Indicated and Splinting as Needed

Some infants born preterm require gentle range of motion due to contracture or
prolonged immobility (e.g., the very ill infant sedated and “paralyzed” for recov-
ery). As an expert in the musculoskeletal system, the physical therapist is qualified
to provide this intervention, but the neonatal musculoskeletal system is fragile and
vulnerable to injury. Providing passive range of motion can put the neonate at risk
for fractures (Dabezies & Warren, 1997). A special consideration for infants born
preterm is that they have cartilaginous joints at the wrists and ankles (Buckwalter,
1994). In addition, infants born preterm are at greater risk for developing osteope-
nia. Clinical evidence of mineral bone deficiency has been demonstrated in 30–50%
of infants born with very low birth weight (VLBW) who are fed unfortified human
milk (Hawthorne, Griffin, & Abrams, 2004; Koo et al., 1988), so particular care must
be taken when providing range of motion. Often in consultation with occupational
therapy, splinting is reserved for contracted joints or used as an immobilization aide
as needed (e.g., to stabilize fractures; Dabezies & Warren, 1997).
Facilitate Periods of Exploratory Moving

The promotion of exploratory movement without boundaries is another important
component of developmentally appropriate positioning and handling. With proxi-
mal support, maturing preterm infants benefit from unrestrained movement with
the demands of gravity reduced. Strength and control gained by exploratory move-
ment experience form a bridge for the infant to begin more complex antigravity
movement.
With trunk and neck support provided in supine, prone, or sidelying positions,
a preterm infant can enjoy the freedom to move one or more extremities without
boundaries imposed by blankets, nested bedding, or caregiver’s hands. In supine ly-
ing, support of the head in midline and containment of the upper extremities close
to the trunk can enable an infant to explore a wider variety of lower extremity
movements than otherwise tolerated. Also in supine lying with containment of all
the extremities, provision of a neck roll can encourage an infant to engage in side-
to-side neck rotation, orientation to voices, and to briefly hold a midline position.
While sidelying with trunk support, the un-weighted upper arm and leg are free
to move. Initially, preterm infants typically respond best to free movement of only
one arm or leg in this position. Some infants find horizontal sidelying particularly
challenging and often more so on one specific side. Poor tolerance of sidelying can
be due to restricted expansion of the lower, weight-bearing rib cage, delayed gastric
emptying, or gastroesophageal reflux. Elevation from horizontal sidelying or supine
lying on a firm surface to a 30–40 degree angle can allow improved expansion of
the rib cage as well as relieve gastric problems (van Wijk et al., 2007). Exploratory
movement in supine lying is more demanding than in prone for infants with pul-
monary insufficiency requiring supplemental oxygen. In prone position, infants who
are oxygen-dependent have higher lung volumes and functional residual capacity
88 Byrne and Garber
that improves oxygen saturation and reduces the effort of breathing (Bhat et al.,
2003). Among healthy preterm infants, however, the cardiopulmonary demands of
different positions seem to be clinically insignificant (Dolberg, Yacov, Mimouni, &
Barak, 2004; Levy et al., 2006). In prone lying with head, neck, and trunk ventrally
supported as well as elevated off the support surface to shift weight off the lower ex-
tremities, infants can explore kicking without boundaries to push against. In prone
lying at 30–40 degrees incline, stabilization of the extremities close to the trunk can
allow an infant to explore head lifting with variable degrees of rotation.
Promote Alerting and Interaction

Promoting infant alerting for various developmental tasks such as feeding,

environmental exploration, and social interaction with family is a role for the
physical therapist in the NICU. Facilitating infant state regulation so that the
infant achieves a calm alert state (Brazelton Level 4) can be done through various
interventions (Brazelton & Nugent, 1995). Researchers have shown that a carefully
implemented program consisting of auditory (soothing voice), tactile (massage),
visual (attempted eye contact), and vestibular (horizontal rocking; ATVV) stimuli
can promote alerting in healthy convalescing preterm infants (White-Traut,
Nelson, Silvestri, Cunningham, & Patel, 1997; White-Traut, Nelson, Silvestri,
Patel, & Kilgallon, 1993). This research (please refer to the articles for more
detail regarding the protocol used) has since been expanded to include extremely
preterm infants (born at 23–26 weeks GA) and preterm infants with intracranial
lesions (White-Traut et al., 2002). In the latter study, the infants receiving ATTV
demonstrated significantly increased alerting during the intervention that was
significantly correlated with reduced length of stay. In addition, the proportion of
nipple feeds increased significantly faster for infants in the study group than those
in the control group (White-Traut et al., 2002).
Despite these positive findings, the therapist must take care not to overstimu-
late the infant or create physiologic instability. Sensitivity to infant behavioral and
physiologic cues is critical. In addition, it is necessary for the therapist to remem-
ber that a preterm infant may have a delayed reaction to an intervention so one
should ascertain the effects on sleeping patterns and feeding after the stimulation.
When implementing an ATTV program to encourage infant alerting, it should be
noted that White-Traut et al. (1997) found that tactile stimulation alone was too
stimulating and that the vestibular component helped modulate the overall sensory
experience of the preterm infant.
MOVEMENT THERAPY
It is important for the infant to have opportunities for movement, both guided and
facilitated and self-initiated (with protective boundaries). These movement oppor-
tunities are provided in the context of varying the infant’s position (e.g., supine,
sidelying, prone, supported upright). The next section of this article presents phys-
ical therapy interventions from the Movement Therapy portion of the Infant Care
Path for Physical Therapy in the NICU (Campbell, 2013; Figure 4).
FIGURE 4. Movement Therapy, Intervention section of the Infant Care Path for Physical
Therapy in the NICU. Source: Campbell (2013).
Guided Extremity Movements

Development of strength may be facilitated by guided flexion and extension move-
ments of the infant’s lower extremities, similar to a bicycle riding pattern, initially
performed with hands placed around the knee joint for protection. During this ac-
tivity, as the infant begins to actively kick, the physical therapist’s hands move to the
plantar surface of the foot in order to give tactile and proprioceptive input as the
infant gently kicks. This provides the infant with a surface to extend against. This
movement does not involve traction or joint compression, and it is not explicitly
resistive. The maneuver is meant to mimic what infants experience when pushing
against the intrauterine wall. The purpose of this exercise is to facilitate both free
kicking and guided contained kicking, movements the infant is free to perform in
utero, but that are limited by the constraints of swaddling and the force of gravity
in the NICU. These flexion and extension movements of the legs may be beneficial
for joint molding, because after birth infants born preterm do not experience the
resistance of the fluid-filled utero environment (Sweeney & Gutierrez, 2002). In
addition, the opportunity for the infant to gently push against their parent’s hand
(similar to pushing against the intrauterine wall) may help decrease bone deminer-
alization (Litmanovitz et al., 2003; Moyer-Mileur, Brunstetter, McNaught, Gill, &
Chan, 2000), as research showed that guided range of motion exercises for VLBW
infants decreases osteopenia.
Increased Time in Upright Position

The infant’s tolerance of upright positioning is important for multiple caregiving sit-
uations. Supported sitting is developmentally beneficial because it will (1) facilitate
the use of the neck rotator and extensor muscles, which may foster development of
head control; and (2) promote an alert and visually oriented behavioral state (Shea-
han & Brockway, 1994). Prior to 35 weeks PMA, most preterm infants initially ex-
perience the upright position for brief periods during routine care within their iso-
lette and while being held by a parent or other caregiver. Schrod and Walter (2002)
investigated concern that movement from horizontal lying to vertical is associated
with orthostatic stress in fragile preterm infants. Reassuringly, they reported no clin-
ically significant autonomic or cerebral oxygenation effects among infants less than
1,500 g during the first week of life at 30 degrees elevation of the whole body.
90 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 5. This position provides upright support of the infant facing away from the
caregiver with their back and head against the caregiver’s chest and anterior support of
the infant’s chin and trunk provided by the caregiver’s hand. In response to this support,
the infant pictured is actively bringing her head toward vertical midline.
At approximately 35 weeks PMA, preterm infants typically increase their up-

right position time as they gain competence in nipple feeding. With experience
and maturation, the infant’s responsive periods during supported sitting can ex-
pand from 1 min to 2 min in the middle of a feeding to 10–15 min periods following
feeding several times each day. With trunk support and freedom to move in sup-
ported upright, spontaneous head righting effort and exploratory movements with
extremities can gradually increase in frequency and duration. While a swaddled in-
fant is held by a caregiver, there are many variations of upright positioning that can
be used. Typically, the most easily tolerated position for an infant is upright prone
at the caregiver’s shoulder. Another involves upright support of the infant facing
away from the caregiver with their back and head against the caregiver’s chest and
anterior support of the infant’s chin and trunk provided by the caregiver’s hand
(Figure 5). A supportive type of semi-upright lap sitting requires the caregiver’s feet
to be elevated by a stool in order to provide the infant with full posterior support
of their head and trunk while looking toward the caregiver. Supported lap sitting
from semi-upright to full upright with the adult’s hands providing variable degrees
of anterior and posterior trunk and neck support is the most challenging for young
infants (Figure 6).
As infants’ interest in the world around them exceeds the time parents, staff
members, and even volunteer caregivers have available to hold them upright, use of
infant seats and swings often begins. These devices have both advantages and disad-
vantages that should be acknowledged by nurses and therapists as well as explained
FIGURE 6. While full trunk support is provided by adult hands, gentle lifting of the upper
trunk aligns the spine in vertical, limits increased pressure on the stomach, and elongates
muscles of the trunk. This can in turn facilitate head righting and interactive orientation
responses as well as burping.
to parents. The seats frequently need positioning devices or multiple blanket and
diaper rolls to maintain midline alignment of the infant’s neck and trunk as well
as support their shoulder and pelvic girdles. Young infants can tire rapidly in these
seats and with fatigue their tolerance of environmental and social stimulation de-
creases. With supportive positioning and gradually increasing time in these devices,
young infants can benefit from the increased upright positioning time in swings
and infant seats. Once infants gain endurance for upright positioning, they may be-
gin to modulate postural responses as well as alter their extremity movements as
the degree of external trunk support and the angle of sitting change. As infants
increase their time in upright positions, therapists can instruct parents to observe
signs of their infant’s maturing movement control as well as fatigue and discuss
the value and drawbacks of time spent in swings and infant seats following hospi-
tal discharge. Investigating the relationship between infant play-equipment use, fa-
vored play positions, and motor development, Bartlett and Kneale-Fanning (2003)
found that following hospital discharge, a large percentage of preterm infants spent
more time sitting in swings and infant seats as well as carried in a sitting position
than other play positions. The authors were unable to identify a cause versus effect
92 Byrne and Garber
relationship, but concluded that lack of sitting ability contributed to an infant’s pref-
erence for prolonged carrying or supportive seating while the extended periods of
carrying and equipment use limited the infant’s opportunities for development of
independent sitting ability.
Varied Developmental Positions

Although preterm infants benefit from spending gradually increasing time in sup-
ported upright positions, they should experience movement in prone, supine, and
sidelying to promote motor development and prevent secondary impairments such
as plagiocephaly and torticollis. Preterm infants 35 weeks PMA and older spend
increasing amounts of time sleeping in supine and feeding in supported upright po-
sitions. Consequently, effort may need to be directed toward providing the infant
experiences moving in prone and sidelying.
One strategy that we have found successful is to vary the position in which the in-
fant is held, especially by their parents. When providing SSC in semi-upright prone,
the direction the infant faces should be alternated between right and left, especially
if the infant prefers rotation to one side. Infants also benefit from variation in cra-
dled holding positions. Right-handed caregivers tend to hold infants with their left
arm, leaving their more dexterous right hand free for manipulative tasks. An in-
fant cared for by primarily right-handed people can become adept at orientation
to voices and movement toward their own right side while ignoring the majority
of input from the left (Hummel & Fortado, 2005). These caregiving patterns with
unidirectional stimulation can contribute to the progression of plagiocephaly. Al-
though it feels awkward initially, encouragement of right-handed parents to cradle
the infant with their right arm provides that infant with social stimulation to which
they can respond from the left side.
As infants begin to lift their head while held against a caregiver’s shoulder, this
righting response is optimally facilitated from each of the adult’s shoulders. Imma-
ture head righting effort is often characterized by rotation to one side rather than
a midline position. While lifting their head, infants also tend to rotate toward the
direction of their caregiver’s voice or face. The pattern of simply placing an infant
with their head at opposite ends of their bed every other day or following each feed-
ing during the day is helpful to present different environmental stimulation and aid
bilateral orientation by the infant. As previously mentioned, sitting with trunk sup-
port from a caregiver is a very different task for an infant than upright placement
in a swing or infant seat with either a molded plastic or a cloth hammock seat. Nev-
ertheless, each of these positions provides a variety of postural challenges for an
infant, opportunities for antigravity upper extremity movement, and engagement
with social or environmental stimulation from varied directions.
Before discharge from the NICU, the majority of preterm infants enjoy
semi-prone snuggling and movement on a caregiver’s lap or chest. The challenge
of prone head righting is reduced and head lifting to find a familiar voice is
more easily facilitated in this semi-prone position at approximately a 45 degree
angle. Time for continuation of this experience needs to be incorporated into the
infant’s daily routine in anticipation of their discharge especially as they spend
more time sleeping in supine. The addition of prone play or rest time following
nipple feeding can be encouraged and modeled for parents by therapists as well
as nursing staff. The importance of supine sleeping is usually modeled for and
emphasized to parents prior to the time of a preterm infant’s hospital discharge.
Ideally, this instruction is coupled with acknowledgment of the importance of
“tummy time play.” Handouts on tummy time activities in multiple languages
are available at http://www.pathways.org/awareness/parents/tummy-time as well as
from Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta at http://www.choa.org/childrens-hospital-
services/orthopaedics/programs-services/orthotics-and-prosthetics/tummy-time-
tools.
The importance of variable play positions on sensorimotor development is ev-
ident in studies of typically developing infants. Majnemer and Barr (2005) deter-
mined from analysis of parentally completed “infant behavior diaries” that prone
play or “tummy time” was seldom incorporated into an infant’s daily routine. At
four months, more than 30% of 52 infants were never placed in prone and 75%
spent less than 20 min in prone daily. Majnemer and Barr also determined that
the average time four- to six-month-olds spent in supported swing or infant seat
sitting was 4 hr per day. In general, infants with little or no prone activity time
scored lower on the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) at four months and on
the Peabody Developmental Motor Scales (PDMS) at six months. Another investi-
gation among typically developing term infants at four months revealed that most
of their alert time was spent being held and supported in sitting (Dudek-Shriber &
Zelazny, 2007). Sixty of the 100 infants spent 30 min or less in prone daily. In com-
parison, the median time infants were held in sitting was two-and-a-half hours daily
in addition to the three-and-a-half hours they spent positioned in sitting each day.
Infants who spent less than 1 hr and 20 min in prone were more likely to demon-
strate delayed antigravity skills in prone, supine, and sitting as measured by the
AIMS. The influence of positioning on early development of full-term infants does
not necessarily have long-term consequences. The results nevertheless do support
positioning and the environment of play as important for infants at risk for devel-
opmental delays.
In a study of caregiver handling of preterm infants during dressing, bathing, and
play, Murney and Campbell (1998) reported infrequent use of the prone position.
The limited ability of infants with diffuse or focal CNS damage to enjoy move-
ment play in a variety of positions is a consideration when planning interventions.
Comparison of age- and gender-matched infants three- to eight-months-old with
and without positional plagiocephaly revealed a significant difference in support-
ive sitting time in infant seats and swings but not in prone playing time (Kennedy,
Majnemer, Farmer, Barr, & Platt, 2009). Most of the infants studied spent brief
times playing in prone, but development of more mature motor skills as measured
by the AIMS was positively correlated with prone play duration regardless of pla-
giocephalic deformity. Fetters and Huang (2007) investigated the influence of sleep,
play, and feeding positions on motor development through nine months CA in low-
risk term infants and preterm infants with and without white matter disease (WMD)
such as periventricular leukomalacia (PVL). Supine sleeping did not have a nega-
tive effect on motor development while prone sleep and play had a positive effect.
The majority of the infants played and were fed in either supine or sitting. A large
percentage of infants slept in prone at least part of the time and this is reflected in
higher AIMS scores at one month regardless of GA at birth or CNS status. At five
94 Byrne and Garber
months, sleeping and playing in prone were associated with higher AIMS scores.
At nine months, a predominance of play in sitting was negatively associated with
AIMS scores.
Although the studies cited primarily focus on infant development between four
and nine months, family education and instruction at the time of the infant’s dis-
charge form the foundation for the practice of varying sleep, play, and feeding
positions until the infant becomes mobile. Through a preterm infant’s hospital
course, persistent irritability in any position can be a signal of discomfort or stress
that should be evaluated. Sources of infant irritability in a particular position in-
clude: GERD, constipation, intestinal gas, atelectasis, fatigue from increased work
of breathing, weakness and inability to move because of too much or too little con-
finement, too little stability, and limited or too much sensory input. With an under-
standing of the source(s) of irritability, therapists can modify the position or envi-
ronment and reintroduce the experience. They can, in turn, help parent to do the
same rather than simply avoiding new or challenging experiences for their infant.
Enhancement of Trunk Mobility and Diaphragmatic Breathing

Adequate diaphragm control for ventilation is required in order for an infant to
enjoy movement during periods of alertness. Adequate lower esophageal sphincter
function and diaphragm control are needed to prevent reflux of gastric secretions
and food into the esophagus or pharynx while the infant’s trunk provides a stable
base for extremity or neck movement. These challenges are most evident among
but not limited to infants with GERD and CLD or bronchopulmonary dysplasia
(BPD). Premature birth is associated with reduced lung function during at least the
first months of life (Friedrich, Stein, Pitrez, Corso, & Jones, 2006) and some level
of airway obstruction has been identified in pulmonary function studies of preterm
infants with no history of neonatal respiratory disease. Friedrich and colleagues
(2006) determined that for each week of increased GA at birth, preterm infants
gain an average 7% increase in mid-range forced expiratory flow or the efficiency
of exhalation. Limitations in air flow were thought to result from persistently small
diameter airways in the distal bronchial tree as well as decreased stability of these
small airways (Friedrich et al., 2006). In other words, most prematurely born infants
move less air out of their lungs during exhalation than a comparable size full-term
infant would.
Among preterm infants 34 weeks PMA and older, a challenge to antigravity
movement is that postural muscles are often used as assistive respiratory muscles.
With an increased oxygen requirement imposed by active movement or nipple feed-
ing, increased respiratory rate and recruitment of accessory respiratory muscles
such as the trapezius and levator scapulae are more likely to occur. In addition
to decreased efficiency of exhalation due to small, distal airway obstruction, infants
with CLD can develop altered breathing patterns including a longer delay between
diaphragmatic contraction and detectable initiation of inspiratory air flow, possibly
because of decreased lung compliance (Hutten et al., 2010). In our experience, tho-
racic spinal extension and scapular retraction are postures used by preterm infants
to stabilize the chest wall in an attempt to improve the efficiency of diaphragmatic
contraction during active movement and nipple feeding. This, however, often lim-
its the infant’s exploratory extremity movements, and swallow-breath coordination
FIGURE 7. By distraction of the lower ribs toward the pelvis in a manner similar to maturely
coordinated abdominal muscles, the diaphragm has a more stable base from which to
function and the extremities have more proximal stability from which to move. In this
picture, costal border support is used to support the infant’s tolerance of supine lying.
while nipple feeding. Consequently, fatigue as indicated by irritability, drowsiness,

tachypnea, increased work of breathing, and/or diminished coordination should
be anticipated among preterm infants. As the preterm infant engages in more
antigravity movement during routine care as well as attempts the intake of larger
volumes by nipple feeding, the infant’s need for more frequent and/or longer dura-
tion rest periods also should be anticipated.
The supine position is particularly challenging for infants with CLD, GERD, or
both of these conditions. Using the maximum inspiratory pressure as a direct mea-
sure of diaphragm strength or work load, Dimitriou and colleagues (2002) found
supine and semi-upright supine to be more demanding than prone lying, but that
oxygen saturation was significantly higher in semi-upright positions in comparison
to supine lying. Clinically, caregivers observe that some infants recover from low
oxygen saturation rapidly in supine while nested in a quiet alert state but require
additional oxygen support during routine care or feeding. Tolerance of supine can
be improved by elevation of the head of the bed as well as planning intervention
before feeding occurs. During periods of supine movement and rest, therapists and
other caregivers can assist by stabilization of the lower ribs in alignment with the
pelvis. By distracting the lower ribs toward the pelvis, a function of the abdominal
muscles, the diaphragm has a more stable base for contraction and the legs have
more proximal stability from which to move (Figure 7).
While supine or semi-upright in a caregiver’s lap, an infant’s midline head, trunk,
and pelvic alignment can be supported by the positioning of the caregiver’s legs.
96 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 8. This infant is in a position of semi-upright supine on a caregiver’s lap. The

caregiver is sitting in a chair with their feet on a stool that places the infant at approximately
a 45 degree angle. With the infant supported in this position, their muscles of shoulder
elevation and scapular retraction can be gently lengthened as the caregiver passively
lowers and adducts the shoulders as well as protracts the scapulae. With the use of
these accessory respiratory muscles limited, the infant can experience upper extremity
movement toward the midline while depending upon diaphragmatic breathing.
With this support provided, the therapist can then gently lengthen the muscles of
shoulder elevation and scapular retraction while passively lowering and adducting
the shoulders as well as protracting the scapulae. With the use of these accessory
respiratory muscles limited, the infant can experience upper extremity movement
toward the midline while depending upon diaphragmatic breathing (Figure 8). With
trunk and pelvic alignment maintained in supine, a therapist can facilitate abdomi-
nal muscle control by gently lengthening spinal extension muscles with passive ele-
vation of the pelvis in a posterior tilt. From this position, the infant can experience
midline head and trunk orientation and/or lower extremity movement while de-
pending upon diaphragmatic breathing (Figure 9). Simply trusting their ventilatory
capacity in supine or elevated supine positions without assistive respiratory mus-
cles is a stressful challenge for some infants to meet before extremity movement or
social interaction is possible.
Sidelying presents a ventilatory challenge for some infants with GERD as well
as those with persistent pulmonary insufficiency. The infant may initially prefer
one side to alleviate reflux symptoms or decrease demand on areas of chronic pul-
monary infiltration or atelectasis. As feeding volume requirements increase, each
sidelying position presents a different challenge for infants with reflux. Right side-
lying facilitates gastric emptying immediately following feeding but can also facil-
itate reflux. Left sidelying can delay gastric emptying but avoid reflux (van Wijk
et al., 2007). In our experience, because a neonate’s rib cage is flexible and primarily
FIGURE 9. With trunk and pelvic alignment maintained in supine, a caregiver can
assist immature abdominal muscle control by gently lengthening spinal extension mus-
cles with passive elevation of the pelvis into a posterior tilt. From this position, the infant
can experience midline head and trunk orientation and/or lower extremity movement.
cartilaginous, the volume of the weight-bearing side of the chest can be significantly
decreased in sidelying. Furthermore, we have observed that an infant may be com-
fortable resting on the side of diminished pulmonary function, but irritable resting
on the other side with limited expansion of lobes depended upon for compensation.
Even after the pulmonary condition has resolved or reflux symptoms have been ef-
fectively treated, habitual breathing patterns and limited soft tissue extensibility
may persist and be reflected in poor tolerance of a specific sidelying position.
In order for an infant to maintain adequate ventilation in sidelying without ac-
cessory respiratory muscle use and trunk extension, elevation of the head of the
bed is once again an important first step. While posteriorly cupping the infant’s
head and pelvis, a therapist can passively flex the thoracic spine to neutral. Main-
taining adequate oxygen saturation without tachypnea and tachycardia is the initial
goal. Because accessory respiratory muscle use is typically symmetrical, the sidely-
ing position may limit the infant’s reliance on accessory muscles. The infant’s own
weight is usually sufficient to cup the lower shoulder anteriorly and protract the
scapula. When ventilation is not a challenge in sidelying, an infant can interact
with caregivers and enjoy exploratory movement of the un-weighted arm and leg.
While being held by a caregiver in sidelying, the problem of restricted ventilation
of the lower, weight-bearing chest can be resolved by simply elevating the infant. In
98 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 10. While being held by a caregiver in sidelying, the problem of restricted
ventilation of the lower, weight-bearing chest can be resolved by simply elevating the infant
to approximately a 45 degree angle. In this elevated sidelying position, the weight-bearing
shoulder can be held in overhead flexion with the scapula protracted to limit accessory
respiratory muscle use while ventilation is no longer restricted.
elevated sidelying, the weight-bearing shoulder can be held in overhead flexion with
the scapula protracted to limit accessory respiratory muscle use (Figure 10). Ele-
vated sidelying with lateral trunk flexion is a position in which ventilation of the
lower lung is enhanced. While gaining endurance in this position may be an initial
goal for an infant with CLD, alternate positioning to each side can become a valu-
able rest and recovery position for the infant during nipple feeding or antigravity
movement.
Prone lying is frequently the preferred position for rest and recovery among in-
fants, especially those with GERD and CLD, but horizontal prone can be a chal-
lenge. In elevated prone with the head above the stomach level, reflux symptoms
are less likely to occur. This elevated prone position can occur on a caregiver’s chest,
at their shoulder, across their lap, or in the infant’s bed. By gently positioning both
arms overhead while the infant is in an elevated prone position, the scapulae are bi-
laterally protracted, use of accessory respiratory muscles is limited, and diaphragm
function is enhanced. Initially, some infants only tolerate overhead flexion of the
arm on one side. An additional benefit of positioning the infant across a caregiver’s
lap is the potential to eliminate any pressure on a full stomach that enhances di-
aphragm excursion for inspiration and decreases the potential for emesis. If the
infant is not trying to actively lift their head, flexion of the trunk can occur as the
infant relaxes across the caregiver’s thigh (Figure 11). In this elevated prone posi-
tion, the infant can burp and pass gas and stool with decreased potential for eme-
sis following feedings. An infant can also fall asleep, engage in head lifting and/or
FIGURE 11. By gently positioning both arms overhead while the infant is in an elevated
prone position, the scapulae are bilaterally protracted, use of accessory respiratory muscles
is limited, and diaphragm function is enhanced.
kicking, as well as enjoy deep tactile stimulation of their back and soles of their feet
in this elevated prone position. Infants can be carried in an elevated prone position
with overhead shoulder flexion, weight off the abdomen, and the head elevated
above the stomach (Figure 12). In our experience, parents coached through and re-
inforced for use of elevated prone positions following feedings seem to transition
well to “tummy time play” at home.
Promotion of Antigravity Movements

Green, Mulcahy, and Pountney (1995) provide evidence that typical infant devel-
opment includes a relatively predictable progression of increasing postural stabil-
ity, controlled weight shifting, and isolated limb movement. More than 90% of the
developmental changes they observed among 18 infants with typical development
occurred after postural control was concurrently evident in both prone and supine.
Their results suggest that strength and postural control in both prone and supine
are required before even brief symmetrical sitting is achieved. Green et al. also ob-
served that functional movement was influenced by the surface upon which an in-
fant was placed and that infants initially reverted to less mature postures when per-
forming movements associated with orientation, reaching, and contact responses
with either their hands or feet.
Characteristics of preterm infant’s early antigravity movements have been doc-
umented and compared between full term and preterm infants. From two to four
months CA, significant differences between full term and preterm infants are ev-
ident in postural adjustments and in extremity movements during reaching and
100 Byrne and Garber
FIGURE 12. Infants can be carried in this elevated prone position with weight off the
abdomen and the head elevated above the stomach. This infant has responded to the
position of the caregiver’s arm by upper extremity flexion with shoulder internal rotation
and adduction. Positioning both shoulders in greater overhead flexion over the caregiver’s
arm than is illustrated by this photograph, can limit accessory respiratory muscle use while
an infant recovers from the work of feeding or a stressful event.
kicking (Fallang, Saugstad, Grogaard, & Hadders-Algra, 2003a; Heathcock, Bhat,

Lobo, & Galloway, 2004; Heathcock, Bhat, Lobo, & Galloway, 2005). Dusing,
Mercer, Yu, Reilly, and Thorpe (2005) compared supine trunk positions of 18
preterm infants with those of 15 full-term infants at 40–43 weeks PMA and found
that full-term infants maintained trunk positions of flexion or neutral approxi-
mately two-thirds of the time and rolled to sidelying more frequently than preterm
infants. The motor behavior of the preterm infants corresponded to the least mature
level of supine posture control described by Green and colleagues (1995). Dusing
and colleagues (2005) found that prematurely born infants around 40 weeks PMA
do not spend more time in extension positions as popularly thought, but they do
roll from supine to sidelying less often than infants born at term. Comparing six-
month-old prematurely born infants with full-term infants, Fallang, Saugstad, and
Hadders-Algra (2003b) identified persisting differences in weight-shifting patterns
while reaching.
Early patterns of spontaneous arm waving and kicking provide the basic pat-
terns that infants elaborate into more complex, controlled reaching and environ-
mental exploration with both hands and feet. Links between these initial sponta-
neous antigravity extremity movements and early cognitive skills as well as complex
prehension and manipulative skills have been confirmed by research (Heathcock &
Galloway, 2009; Heathcock, Lobo, & Galloway, 2008). Associations between initial
walking patterns and kicking as well as supported treadmill stepping response char-
acteristics have been confirmed by several studies (Jeng, Chen, Tsou, Chen, & Luo,
2004; Luo et al., 2009). There is also evidence, however, that differences remain
between preterm and full-term infants as they develop reaching and locomotion
skills that are neither consistent nor predictive of significant morbidity or guaran-
tees of normality (Fallang et al., 2003a).
Between 35 and 37 weeks PMA, as preterm infants gain endurance and tol-
erate multiple positions without physiologic compromise, they begin to include
more antigravity components in their exploratory movements. Emerging postural
responses can be evident during transitions out of and back into the infant’s bed as
well as during supported upright at various angles during feeding and carrying. In
association with diaper and clothing changes, vigorous extremity movements un-
related to stress behaviors seem at times to make the process quite difficult. It is
during these periods of routine caregiving while infants are alert for expanding pe-
riods of time that therapists can teach parents to wait for responses as well as the
methods to facilitate their infant’s antigravity movement within these functional
caregiving activities.
The opportunities for preterm infants to engage in antigravity movement dur-
ing caregiving in the NICU environment as well as post-discharge have been doc-
umented as part of an investigation of the construct validity of the Test of Infant
Motor Performance (Murney & Campbell, 1998). Following analysis of videotapes

of caregiving activities (bathing and dressing) and interactive play scheduled 1 hr
before feeding, the authors determined that the average duration of handling was
13.9 min with a range of 7 min to 18 min among infants 33–41 weeks PMA. The ma-
jority of infants in the entire sample from 33 weeks PMA to 12 weeks CA were ex-
posed to at least three different positions during each cycle of care and play. Among
35–37 weeks PMA infants preparing for hospital discharge as well as during their
initial weeks following discharge, these handling periods occur at least eight times a
day in association with their need to feed approximately every 3 hr. Consequently,
infants can have multiple 10–15 min opportunities for antigravity movement and in-
teractive responses daily if their caregivers assist them with proximal stability and
wait for their active responses.
As infants reach 35–37 weeks PMA, one of the first measures needed to enhance
their persistence in spontaneous antigravity extremity movement is gradual elimi-
nation of restrictive swaddling and nested bedding. As these same infants transition
out of an isolette and into an open bed, nesting needs to be gradually eliminated
so infants can experience spontaneous movement against a firm surface and gain
self-calming capacity. The findings of Green and colleagues (1995) identify different
responses to a firm surface among infants with less mature levels of postural con-
trol in contrast with those having more mature levels of control. The swaddling and
nesting that helps calm infants may also provide shoulder and pelvic support they
still depend upon for control of their posture and extremity movement. A similar
degree of nesting may however frustrate a more mature infant who is able to shift
their center of gravity and isolate extremity movements provided the opportunity
on a firm surface.
Promotion of Supine Anti-Gravity Movement

Among maturing preterm infants, supine antigravity movements typically occur
with more control in the lower extremities before the upper. The possible reasons
for this are discussed by Heathcock and Galloway (2009) in their comparison of
foot reaching with hand reaching skill development among four- to six-month-old
infants. In order for less than 40 weeks PMA infants to kick and reach while supine,
they typically need trunk and proximal joint stability before they are able to transi-
tion from movements in a relatively horizontal plane into more vertically directed
movements. Antigravity leg movement can be encouraged by a caregiver assist-
ing the abdominal muscles with lifting the pelvis into a posterior tilt. Antigravity
arm movement can be encouraged by a caregiver assisting the pectoral muscles

with cupping the shoulders ventrally. These two Neurodevelopmental Treatment
or NDT-based facilitation methods are explained in detail by both Bly (1999) and
Boehme (1990). Rather than deciding upon a specific time or duration for anti-
gravity movement, therapists can assist parents in identification of optimal times
during caregiving for support of antigravity extremity movement. By teaching par-
ents methods for proximal support, they can help their infant extend the duration
and variation of extremity movement multiple times daily in the functional context
of caregiving.
Promotion of Prone Antigravity Movements

Prone antigravity movements typically include neck rotation and head lifting with
increasing degrees of thoracic spinal extension as the infant matures and gains
strength. These movements typically occur while a caregiver supports an infant
prone on their chest or lap at variable angles to the horizontal plane as well as
when a caregiver holds them suspended in open space during multiple caregiving
tasks. The extent to which both an infant’s trunk stability and trunk-to-pelvic align-
ment are assisted by the caregiver is reflected in the quality and duration of the
infant’s head lifting and interactive orientation responses. Placement of one of the
caregiver’s hands firmly over the infant’s pelvis and hips may provide sufficient sta-
bility to encourage head lifting as the visual stimuli or the angle of the caregiver’s
lap change. Additional stability and alignment assistance can be provided by the
caregiver’s hands positioned firmly at one or both sides of the trunk, distracting the
infant’s lower ribs down toward the pelvis and assisting caudal-ward weight trans-
fer. These are also NDT-based methods for facilitation of head lifting in prone that
are explained in detail by both Bly (1999) and Boehme (1990).
Promotion of Antigravity Movements in Supported Sitting

Assistive measures for increasing an infant’s tolerance of and endurance in the sit-
ting position as well as methods to facilitate head lifting and extremity movements
in stationary sitting are discussed previously in this article in Section “Increased
time in upright position.” Typical caregiving routines at the time of discharge, how-
ever, also include transitions into and out of sitting as well as movement through
space while in a sitting position. The complexity of an infant’s responses to these
transitional movements varies with the support and alignment assistance provided
for the trunk and neck, with the angle of the head and trunk relative to vertical,
and with the degree of free movement allowed for the extremities. Therapists can
teach a caregiver to lift their infant or move them from supine or prone into sitting
while providing trunk to pelvic alignment and stability as well as to pause during
the movement and wait for the infant’s emerging neck rotation or lateral flexion
responses. These NDT-based methods for facilitation of postural responses during
movement in and out of sitting, carrying, kicking, and reaching in supported sitting
are also explained in detail by both Bly (1999) and Boehme (1990).
Neurodevelopmental Techniques
Neurodevelopmental treatment or NDT techniques are appropriate to include
within movement therapy as preterm infants reach 35–37 weeks PMA (Figure 3).
These techniques have already been described in the previous section as the ba-
sis for many of the methods employed by therapists to promote antigravity move-
ments. Although in wide use and woven into the treatment repertoire of many phys-
ical therapists, NDT as a primary intervention program within the NICU neverthe-
less lacks the support provided by statistically significant, measurable long-term
results from large randomized controlled trials.
A controlled clinical trial provides support for the application of an NDT pro-
gram for preterm infants in the NICU (Girolami & Campbell, 1994). The study
is referenced as evidence supporting movement intervention in the guidelines for
NICU practice (Sweeney, Heriza, Blanchard, & Dusing, 2010). The preterm infants
were at high risk for long-term developmental delay and had three or more posi-
tive neurological findings on the Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale (NBAS)
at 34–35 weeks PMA. Nine preterm infants received NDT, 10 preterm infants re-
ceived social stimulation, and eight full-term infants received no intervention. The
intervention (Girolami & Campbell, 1994) was designed to improve head control,
midline orientation, hands-to-mouth activity, and antigravity movements of the ex-
tremities. The preterm control group received social stimulation in each of the four
positions. NDT-based treatment or social stimulation was provided twice daily for
up to 15 min for at least seven but up to 17 days. Following intervention, infants
were evaluated by examiners blind to group assignment using the NBAS and a sup-
plemental motor test based on the Neurological Assessment of the Preterm and
Full-Term Newborn Infant (Dubowitz & Dubowitz, 1981).
The results indicated that the full-term control group performed significantly
better than either of the preterm groups on the motor performance cluster of the
NBAS, and the preterm control group performed better than other groups on the
autonomic regulation cluster. On the supplemental motor test assessment of pos-
tural control, the preterm infants who received NDT treatment outperformed both
control groups on spontaneous behavior items and the preterm control group on
elicited activity items.
This study has not been replicated and there are no published randomized
controlled trials with a larger sample size that have reported statistically significant
long-term outcomes supporting use of NDT as a primary intervention program in
the NICU. A replication, however, is under way in a large clinical trial in Norway
(http://www2.uit.no/ikbViewer/page/publikum/prosjekter/prosjekt?p document
id=216556).
RESEARCH ON MOTOR INTERVENTION IN NICU

In a review of published intervention studies among infants and toddlers at risk for
developmental delay, 17 studies were identified that occurred within a NICU set-
ting (Blauw-Hospers & Hadders-Algra, 2005). The content of these programs was
described as including combinations of auditory, tactile, visual, and/or vestibular
stimulation as well as calming or stress reduction measures and passive handling.
Ten of the NICU intervention studies provided no evidence of positive or nega-
tive effect on motor development while seven of the studies primarily implement-
ing NIDCAP interventions did support at least short-term positive effects on in-
fant motor development. Two of the intervention programs occurring following
NICU discharge that documented significantly greater motor skill improvement

than their control groups provided descriptions of developmental programs and
parent involvement in the movement play (Barrera, Cunningham, & Rosenbaum,
1986; Lekskulchai & Cole, 2001). Blauw-Hospers and Hadders-Algra (2005) con-
cluded that substantial evidence supported the benefits of developmental training
interventions after NICU discharge in which parents learned how to assist and en-
courage their infant’s motor development. They also concluded that programs lim-
ited to passive handling techniques were not beneficial while those programs that
were focused on specific tasks and stimulated infants to actively explore use of the
emerging movement skill can have a positive influence.
There is evidence supporting the benefits of movement training during the early
months of postnatal life but none supporting this degree of handling and stimula-
tion while infants are in the NICU. Among both maturing full term and preterm
infants, these initial anti-gravity movements can increase in complexity, frequency,
and duration following specific daily training protocols (Heathcock & Galloway,
2009; Heathcock et al., 2008). In the home setting, following eight-week, caregiver-
based daily training programs, infants with initially two months CA increased the
accuracy, frequency, and duration of reaching as well as hand or foot contact with
an object. By four months CA, the prematurely born infants participating in the
training programs performed more optimally than those prematurely born infants
not receiving training. In comparison with full-term infants at four months, the in-
fants who participated in the training programs demonstrated equivalent skill for
several movement characteristics.
Although neither of these studies (Heathcock & Galloway, 2009; Heathcock
et al., 2008) was conducted in the NICU setting or with infants less than two months
CA, the content of the movement training provides some helpful guidance to ther-
apists teaching parents how to encourage their infant’s engagement in antigravity
movement leading up to and following hospital discharge. The movement training
programs focused on task-specific activities provided by parents. The activities in-
volved the active participation of the infant in multimodal, interactive tasks. These
interactive tasks were not only encouraged during the 10-min daily training ses-
sions, but were also likely to be repeated during routine care and play many other
times during each day as the infant’s responses improved. A good resource sum-
marizing the available Cochrane Reviews on the evidence on effects of a variety of
interventions is the chapter on the “Special Care Nursery” in Physical Therapy for
Children, 4th ed. (Kahn-D’Angelo, Blanchard, & McManus, 2012).
Because there is a paucity of evidence on exercise programs in the NICU, clini-

cians are advised to remain current on the scientific literature in order to identify the
most effective interventions to promote motor development in the NICU. Mean-
while, the evidence from the large clinical trial by Lekskulchai and Cole (2001)
and the movement training protocols designed by Heathcock et al. (2008; see also,
Heathcock & Galloway, 2009) provide evidence for recommending home exercise
following hospital discharge.
Declaration of interest
The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for
the content and writing of this article.
ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Eilish M. Byrne, PT, DSc, PCS, is the Professional Development, Education and
Research Specialist for the Department of Rehabilitation Services working in the
Neonatal Intensive Care Unit at Lucile Packard Children’s Hospital, Palo Alto, CA.
June Garber, PT, MACT, is a Senior Physical Therapist working in the Neonatal
Special Care Nurseries at Emory University Hospital Midtown and Grady Memo-
rial Hospital as well as Professor Emerita at Emory University, School of Medicine
Division of Physical Therapy, Atlanta, GA.
REFERENCES
Allen, M. C., & Capute, A. J. (1990). Tone and reflex development before term. Pediatrics, 85(3,
Pt 2), 393–399.
Als, H. (1982). Toward a synactive theory of development: Promise for the assessment and sup-
port of infant individuality. Infant Mental Health, 3(4), 229–243.
Als, H., Duffy, F. H., McAnulty, G. B., Rivkin, M. J., Vajapeyam, S., Mulkern, R. V., et al. (2004).
Early experience alters brain function and structure. Pediatrics, 113, 846–857.
Als, H., Gilkerson, L., Duffy, F., McAnulty, G., Buehler, D., & Vandenberg, K., et al. (2003). A
three-center, randomized, controlled trial of individualized developmental care for very low
birth weight preterm infants: Medical, neurodevelopmental, parenting, and caregiving effects.
Journal of Developmental & Behavioral Pediatrics, 24(6), 399–408.
Als, H., Lawhon, G., Duffy, F. H., McAnulty, G. B., Gibes-Grossman, R., & Blickman, J. G. (1994).
Individualized developmental care for the very low birthweight preterm infant: Medical and
neurofunctional effects. Journal of the American Medical Association, 272, 853–858.
Anand, K. J. S., & Scalzo, F. M. (2000). Can adverse neonatal experiences alter brain development
and subsequent behavior? Biology of the Neonate, 77, 69–82.
Axelin, A., Salantera, S., Kirjavainen, J., & Lehtonen, L. (2009). Oral glucose and parental hold-
ing preferable to opioid in pain management of preterm infants. Clinical Journal of Pain, 25(2),
138–145.
Barrera, M. E., Cunningham, C. E., & Rosenbaum, P. L. (1986). Low birth weight and home
intervention strategies: Preterm infants. Developmental and Behavioral Pediatrics, 7, 361–366.
Bartlett, D., & Kneale Fanning, J. E. (2003). Relationships of equipment use and play positions to
motor development at eight months corrected age of infants born preterm. Pediatric Physical
Therapy, 15, 8–15.
Bhat, R., Annika, J., Leipala, J. A., Singh, N. R., Raffery, G. F., Hannam, S., et al. (2003). Effect of
posture on oxygenation, lung volume and respiratory mechanics in premature infants studied
before discharge. Pediatrics, 112, 29–32.
Bier, J. B., Ferguson, A. E., Morales, Y., Liebling, J. A., Archer, D., Oh, W., et al. (1996). Compar-
ison of skin-to-skin contact with standard contact in low-birth-weight infants who are breast-
fed. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 150(12), 1265–1269.
Blauw-Hospers, C. H., & Hadders-Algra, M. (2005). A systematic review of the effects of
early intervention on motor development. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 47,
421–432.
Bly, L. (1999). Baby treatment based on NDT principles. Tucson, AZ: Therapy Skill Builders.
Boehme, R. (1990). Approach to treatment of the baby. Tucson, AZ: Therapy Skill Builders.
Boiron, M., Da Nobrega, L., Roux, S., Henrot, A., & Saliba, E. (2007). Effects of oral stimula-
tion and oral support on non-nutritive sucking and feeding performance in preterm infants.
Development Medicine and Child Neurology, 49, 439–444.
Bowden, V. R., Greenberg, C. S., & Donaldson, N. E. (2000). Developmental care of the newborn.
Online Journal of Clinical Innovations, 3(7), 1–77.

Brazelton, T. B., & Nugent, J. K. (1995). The Neonatal Behavioral Assessment Scale. London: Mac
Keith Press.
Bremmer, P., Byers, J. F., & Kiehl, E. (2003). Noise and the premature infant: Physiological ef-
fects and practice implication. Journal of Obstetric, Gynecologic and Neonatal Nursing, 32(4),
447–454.
Brown, G. (2009). NICU noise and the preterm infant. Neonatal Network, 28(3), 165–172.
Buckwalter, J. A. (1994). Musculoskeletal tissues and musculoskeletal system. In S. L. Weinstein
& J. A. Buckwalter (Eds.), Turek’s orthopedics, principles and their application (pp. 1–56).
Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott.
Buehler, D. M., Als, H., Duffy, F. H., McAnulty, G. B., & Liederman, J. (1995). Effectiveness of
individualized developmental care for low-risk preterm infants: Behavioral and electrophysi-
ological evidence. Pediatrics, 96, 923–932.
Campbell, S. K. (2013). Use of care paths to improve patient management. Physical and Occu-
pational Therapy in Pediatrics, 33, 27–38.
Cleary, G. M., Spinner, S. S., Gibson, E., & Greenspan, J. S. (1997). Skin-to-skin parental
contact with fragile preterm infants. Journal of the American Osteopathic Association, 97,
457–460.
Corvaglia, L., Rotatori, R., Ferlini, M., Aceti, A., Ancora, G., & Faldella, G. (2007). The effect
of body positioning on gastroesophageal reflux in premature infants: Evaluation by combined
impedance and pH monitoring. Journal of Pediatrics, 151(6), 591–596.
Dabezies, E. J., & Warren, P. D. (1997). Fractures in very low birth weight infants with rickets.
Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 335, 233–239.
de Vries, N. K. S., & Bos, A. F. (2010). The quality of general movements in the first ten days of
life in preterm infants. Early Human Development, 86, 225–229.
Dimitriou, G., Greenough, A., Pink, L., McGhee, A., Hickey, A., & Rafferty, G. F. (2002). Effect
of posture on oxygenation and respiratory muscle strength in convalescent infants. Archives
of Disease in Childhood: Fetal & Neonatal Edition, 86, F147–F150.
Dolberg, S., Yacov, G., Mimouni, F. B., & Barak, M. (2004). The effect of positioning on en-
ergy expenditure in preterm infants: A feasibility study. American Journal of Perinatology,
21, 391–394.
Dubowitz, L., & Dubowitz, V. (1981). The neurological assessment of the preterm and full-term
newborn infant. Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott.
Dudek-Shriber, L., & Zelazny, S. (2007). The effects of prone positioning on the quality of acqui-
sition of developmental milestones in four-month-old infants. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 19,
48–55.
Dusing, S., Mercer, V., Yu, B., Reilly, M., & Thorpe, D., (2005). Trunk position in supine of infants
born preterm and at term: An assessment using computerized pressure mat. Pediatric Physical
Therapy, 17, 2–10.
Engrav, L. H., Heimbach, D. M., Rivara, F. P., Moore, M. L., Wang, J., Carrougher, G. J., et al.
(2010). 12-Year within-wound study of the effectiveness of custom pressure garment therapy.
Burns, 36(7), 975–983.
Fallang, B., Saugstad, O. D., Grogaard, J., & Hadders-Algra, M. (2003a). Kinematic quality of
reaching movements in preterm infants. Pediatric Research, 53(5), 836–842.
Fallang, B., Saugstad, O. D., & Hadders-Algra, M. (2003b). Postural adjustments in preterm in-
fants at 4 and 6 months post-term during voluntary reaching in supine position. Pediatric Re-
search, 54, 6, 826–833.
Feldman, R., Eidelman, A., Sirota, L., & Weller. A. (2002). Comparison of skin-to-skin
(kangaroo) and traditional care: Parenting outcomes and preterm infant development.
Pediatrics, 110, 16–26.
Ferrari, F., Bertoncelli, N., Gallo, C., Roversi, M. F., Guerra, M. P., Ranzi, A., et al. (2007). Posture
and movement in healthy preterm infants in supine position in and outside the nest. Archives
of Diseases in Childhood: Fetal & Neonatal Edition, 92(5), F386–F390.
Fetters, L., & Huang, H. (2007). Motor development and sleep, play, and feeding positions in
very-low-birthweight infant with and without white matter disease. Developmental Medicine
and Child Neurology, 49, 807–813.
Fohe, K., Kropf, S., & Avenarius, S. (2000). Skin-to-skin contact improves gas exchange in pre-
mature infants. Journal of Perinatology, 5, 311–315.
Franco, P., Seret, N., Van Hees, J. N., Scaillet, S., Groswasser, J., & Kahn, A. (2005). Influence of
swaddling on sleep and arousal characteristics of healthy infants. Pediatrics, 115, 1307–1311.
Friedrich, L., Stein, R. T., Pitrez, P. M. C., Corso, A. L., & Jones, M. H. (2006). Reduced lung
function in healthy preterm infants in the first months of life. American Journal of Respiratory
and Critical Care Medicine, 173, 442–447.
Gale, G., & Franck, L. (1998). Toward a standard of care for parents of infants in the neonatal
intensive care unit. Critical Care Nurse, 18, 62–74.
Garber, J. B. (2013). Oral motor function and feeding intervention. Physical and Occupational
Therapy in Pediatrics, 33, 111–138.
Girolami, G. L., & Campbell, S. K. (1994). Efficacy of a neurodevelopmental treatment program

to improve motor control in infants born prematurely. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 6, 175–184.
Goldstein, L. A. (2013). Family support and education. Physical and Occupational Therapy in
Pediatrics, 33, 139–161.
Grant Beuttler, M., & Shewokis, P. A. (2007). Muscle tendon unit comparisons between infants
born preterm and infants born full term: A pilot study. Pediatric Physical Therapy, 19(4),
309–314.
Green, E. M., Mulcahy, C. M., & Pountney, T. F. (1995). An investigation into the development
of early postural control. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 37, 437–448.
Grenier, I., Bigsby, R., Vergara, E., & Lester, B. (2003). Comparison of motor self-regulatory and
stress behaviors of preterm infants across body positions. American Journal of Occupational
Therapy, 57, 289–297.
Hawthorne, K. M., Griffin, I. J., & Abrams, S. A. (2004). Nutritional approaches to the care of
preterm infants. Minerva Pediatrica, 56, 359–372.
Heathcock, J. C., Bhat, A. N., Lobo, M. A., & Galloway, J. (2004). The performance of infants
born preterm and full-term in the mobile paradigm: Learning and memory. Physical Therapy,
84, 808–821.
Heathcock, J. C., Bhat, A. N., Lobo, M. A., & Galloway, J. (2005). The relative kicking frequency
of infants born full-term and preterm during learning and short-term and long-term memory
periods of the mobile paradigm. Physical Therapy, 85, 8–18.
Heathcock, J. C., & Galloway, J. C. (2009). Exploring objects with feet advances movement in
infants born preterm: A randomized controlled trial. Physical Therapy, 89, 1027–1038.
Heathcock, J. C., Lobo, M., & Galloway, J. C. (2008). Movement training advances the emergence
of reaching in infants born at less than 33 weeks of gestational age: A randomized clinical trial.
Physical Therapy, 88, 310–322.
Heimler, R., Langlois, J., Hodel, D. J., Nelin, L. D., & Sasidharan, P. (1992). Effect of positioning
on the breathing patterns of preterm infants. Archives of Disease in Childhood, 67, 312–314.
Hummel, P., & Fortado, D. (2005). Impacting infant head shapes. Advances in Neonatal Care, 5,
329–340.
Hutchfield, K. (1999). Family-centred care: A concept analysis. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 29,
1178–1187.
Hutten, G. J., van Eykern, L. A., Latzin, P., Thamrin, C., van Alderen, W. M., & Frey, U. (2010).
Respiratory muscle activity related to flow and lung volume in preterm infants compared with
term infants. Pediatric Research, 68, 339–343.
Jeng, S., Chen L., Tsou, K., Chen, W. J., & Luo, H., (2004). Relationship between spontaneous
kicking and age of walking attainment in preterm infants with very low birth weight and full-
term infants. Physical Therapy, 84, 159–172.
Jung, I. S. (2005). Effects of cycled lighting on body weight, physiological variables and behavioral
states in low birth weight infants (abstract). Taehan Kanho Hakhoe Chi, 5(1), 143–153.
Kahn-D’Angelo, L., Blanchard, Y., & McManus, B. (2012). The special care nursery. In S. K.
Campbell, R. J. Palisano, & M. N. Orlin (Eds.), Physical therapy for children (4th ed.,
pp. 903–943). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders.

Karagoz, H., Yuksel, F., Ulkur, E., & Evinc, R. (2009). Comparison of efficacy of silicone gel,
silicone gel sheeting, and topical onion extract including heparin and allantoin for the treat-
ment of postburn hypertrophic scars. Burns, 35(8), 1097–1103.
Kennedy, E., Majnemer, A., Farmer, J., Barr, R. G., & Platt, R. W. (2009). Motor development of
infants with positional plagiocephaly. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 29(3),
222–235.
Kirk, A. T., Alder, S. C., & King, J. D. (2007). Cue-based oral feeding clinical pathway results
in earlier attainment of full oral feeding in premature infants. Journal of Perinatology, 27,
572–578.
Koo, W. W., Sherman, R., Succop, P., Oestreich, A. E., Tsang, R. C., Krug-Wispe, S. K., et al.
(1988). Sequential bone mineral content in small preterm infants with and without fractures
and rickets. Journal of Bone and Mineral Research, 3, 193–197.
Lekskulchai, R., & Cole, J. (2001). Effect of a developmental program on motor performance in
infants born preterm. Australian Journal of Physiotherapy, 47, 169–176.
Levy, G., Woolston, D., & Browne, J. V. (2003). Mean noise amounts in level II vs level III neona-
tal intensive care units. Neonatal Network, 22(2), 33–38.
Levy, J., Habib, R. H., Liptsen, E., Singh, R., Kahn, D., Steele, A. M., et al. (2006). Prone versus
supine positioning in the well preterm infant: Effects on work of breathing and breathing
patterns. Pediatric Pulmonology, 41, 754–758.
Litmanovitz, I., Dolfin, T., Friedland, O., Arnon, S., Regev, R., Shainkin-Kestenbaum, R., et al.
(2003). Early physical activity intervention prevents decrease of bone strength in very low
birth weight infants. Pediatrics, 112(1, Pt 1), 15–19.
Li-Tsang, C. W., Zheng, Y. P., & Lau, J. C. (2010). A randomized clinical trial to study the effect
of silicone gel dressing and pressure therapy on posttraumatic hypertrophic scars. Journal of
Burn Care & Research, 31(3), 448–457.
Lowes, L. P., Sveda, M., Gajdosik, C. G., & Gajdosik, R. L. (2012). Musculoskeletal development
and adaptation. In S. K. Campbell, R. J. Palisano, & M. N. Orlin (Eds.), Physical therapy for
children (4th ed., pp. 175–204). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders.
Luo, H.-J., Chen, P.-S., Hsieh, W.-S., Lin, K.-H., Lu, T.-W., Chen, W. J., et al. (2009). Associations of
supported treadmill stepping with walking attainment in preterm and full-term infants. Phys-
ical Therapy, 89, 1215–1225.
Majnemer, A., & Barr, R. G. (2005). Influence of supine sleep positioning on early motor mile-
stone acquisition. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 47, 370–376.
Marcellus, L. (2004). Determination of Positional Skin-Surface Pressures in Premature Infants.
Neonatal Network, 23(1), 25–30.
McGrath, J. M. (2007). Implementation of Interventions that Support Sleep in the NICU. J Peri-
nat Neonatal Nurs, Apr–Jun 21(2), 83–85.
McManus, B. M., & Capistran, P. S. (2008). A case presentation of early intervention with dolicho-
cephaly in the NICU: Collaboration between the primary nursing team and the developmental
care specialist. Neonatal Network, 27(5), 307–315.
Miles, M. S., & Holditch-Davis, D. (1997). Parenting the prematurely born child: Pathways of
influence. Seminars in Perinatology, 21, 254–266.
Moyer-Mileur, L., Brunstetter, V., McNaught, T., Gill, G., & Chan, G. (2000). Daily physical
activity program increases bone mineralization and growth in preterm very low birth weight
infant. Pediatrics, 106, 1088–1092.
Murney, E. M., & Campbell, S. K. (1998). The ecological relevance of the test of infant motor
performance elicited scale items. Physical Therapy, 78, 479–489.
Najarian, S. (1999). Infant cranial molding deformation and sleep position: Implications for pri-
mary care. Journal of Pediatric Health Care, 13, 173–177.
Nakano, H., Konishi, Y., Taga, G., Rieko, T., Hideki, K., Junji, N, et al. (2004). The effect of po-
sitioning on the general movements of preterm babies. Paper presented at the proceedings of
the 14th biennial International Conference on Infant Studies, Chicago, IL, USA.
Neu, M., & Browne, J. V. (1997). Infant physiologic and behavioral organization during swaddled
versus unswaddled weighing. Journal of Perinatology, 17(3), 193–198.
Neufeld, S., & Birkett, S. (2000). What to do about flat heads: Preventing and treating positional
occipital flattening. Axon, 22, 29–31.
O’Brien, L., & Pandit, A. (2006). Silicon gel sheeting for preventing and treating hypertrophic
and keloid scars. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (3), CD003826.
Pechter, U., Maaroos, J., Mesikepp, S., Veraksits, A., & Ots, M. (2003a). Regular low-intensity
aquatic exercise improves cardio-respiratory functional capacity and reduces proteinuria in
chronic renal failure patients. Nephrology Dialysis Transplantation, 18(3), 624–625.
Pechter, U., Ots, M., Mesikepp, S., Zilmer, K., Kullissaar, T., Vihalemm, T., et al. (2003b). Ben-
eficial effects of water-based exercise in patients with chronic kidney disease. International
Journal of Rehabilitation Research, 26(2), 153–156.
Perlman, J. M. (2001). Neurobehavioral deficits in premature graduates of intensive care: Poten-
tial medical and neonatal environmental risk factors. Pediatrics, 108, 1339–1348.
Peters, K. L., Rosychuk, R. J., Hendson, L., Coté, J. J., McPherson, C., & Tyebkhan, J. M. (2009).
Improvement of short- and long-term outcomes for very low birth weight infants: Edmonton
NIDCAP trial. Pediatrics, 124, 1009–1020.
Prechtl, H. F. R. (1990). Qualitative changes of spontaneous movements in fetus and preterm
infant are a marker of neurological dysfunction. Early Human Development, 23, 151–158.
Rivkees, S. A., Mayes, L., Jacobs, H., & Gross, I. (2004). Rest-activity patterns of premature
infants are regulated by cycled lighting. Pediatrics, 113(4), 833–839.
Sakuraba, M., Takahashi, N., Akahoshi, T., Miyasaka, Y., & Suzuki, K. (2011). Use of silicone gel
sheets for prevention of keloid scars after median sternotomy. Surgery Today, 41(4), 496–499.
Schrod, L., & Walter, J. (2002). Effect of head-up body tilt position on autonomic function and
cerebral oxygenation in preterm infants. Biology of the Neonate, 81, 255–259.
Sheahan, M. S., & Brockway, N. F. (1994). The high-risk infant. In J. Tecklin (Ed.), Pediatric phys-
ical therapy (2nd ed., pp. 56–85). Philadelphia, PA: J.B. Lippincott Company.
Short, M. A., Brooks-Brunn, J. A., Reeves, D. S., Yeager, J., & Thorpe, J. A. (1996). The effects
of swaddling versus standard positioning on neuromuscular development in very low birth
weight infants. Neonatal Network, 15(4), 25–31.
Sweeney, J. K. (1983). Neonatal hydrotherapy: An adjunct to developmental intervention in an
intensive care nursery setting. Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 3, 39–52.
Sweeney, J. K. (2003). Feeding proficiency in preterm neonates following hydrotherapy in the
NICU setting (abstract). Pediatric Physical Therapy, 15, 63.
Sweeney, J. K., & Gutierrez, T. (2002). Musculoskeletal implications of preterm infant positioning
in the NICU. Journal of Perinatal & Neonatal Nursing, 16(1), 58–70.
Sweeney, J. K., Heriza, C., & Blanchard, Y. (2009). Neonatal physical therapy. Part 1: Clini-
cal competencies and neonatal intensive care unit clinical training models. Pediatric Physical
Therapy, 21, 296–307.
Sweeney, J. K., Heriza, C. B., Blanchard, Y., & Dusing, S. (2010). Neonatal physical therapy. Part
II: Practice frameworks and evidence-based practice guidelines. Pediatric Physical Therapy,
22, 2–16.
Sweeney, J. K., & Swanson, M. (2001). Low birth weight infants: Neonatal care and follow-up.
In D. A. Umphred (Ed.), Neurological rehabilitation (4th ed., pp. 203–253). St. Louis, MO:
Mosby-Yearbook.
Tinti, G., Somera, R., Jr., Valente, F. M., & Domingos, C. R. (2010). Benefits of kinesiotherapy and
aquatic rehabilitation on sickle cell anemia: A case report. Genetics and Molecular Research,
9(1), 360–364.
Vaivre-Douret, L., Ennouri, K., Jrad, I., Garrec, C., & Papiernik, E. (2004). Effect of position-
ing on the incidence of abnormalities of muscle tone in low-risk, preterm infants. European
Journal of Paediatric Neurology, 8(1), 21–34.
van Vlimmeren, L. A., van der Graaf, Y., Boere-Boonekamp, M. M., L’Hoir, M. P., Helders,
P. J., & Engelbert, R. H. (2008). Effect of pediatric physical therapy on deformational
plagiocephaly in children with positional preference: A randomized controlled trial. Archives
of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 162(8), 712–718.
van Wijk, M. P., Benninga, M. A., Dent, J., Lontis, R., Goodchild, L., McCall, L. M., et al. (2007).
Effect of body position changes on postprandial gastroesophageal reflux and gastric emptying
in the healthy premature neonate. Journal of Pediatrics, 151, 585–590.

Wahlberg, V., Affonso, D. D., & Persson, B. (1992). A retrospective, comparative study using the
kangaroo method as a complement to the standard incubator care. European Journal of Public
Health, 2(1), 34–37.
Wharrad, H. J., & Davis, A. C. (1997). Behavioural and autonomic responses to sound in pre-term
and full-term babies. British Journal of Audiology, 31(5), 315–329.
White-Traut, R. C., Nelson, M. N., Silvestri, J. M., Cunningham, N., & Patel, M. (1997). Responses
of preterm infants to unimodal and multimodal sensory intervention. Pediatric Nursing, 23(2),
169–75, 193.
White-Traut, R. C., Nelson, M. N., Silvestri, J. M., Patel, M. K., & Kilgallon, D. (1993). Patterns
of physiologic and behavioral response of intermediate care preterm infants to intervention.
Pediatric Nursing, 19(6), 625–629.
White-Traut, R. C., Nelson, M. N., Silvestri, J. M., Vasan, U., Littau, S., Meleedy-Rey, P., et al.
(2002). Effect of auditory, tactile, visual and vestibular intervention on length of stay, alertness,
and feeding progression in preterm infant. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 44,
91–97.
Wigger-Albert, W., Kuhlmann, M., Wilhelm, D., Mrowietz, U., Eichhorn, K., Ortega, J., et al.
(2009). Efficacy of a polyurethane dressing versus a soft silicone sheet on hypertrophic scars.
Journal of Wound Care, 18(5), 208, 210–214.

Fisioterapia en La UCI Neonatal

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Fisioterapia en La UCI Neonatal

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Physical & Occupational Therapy in Pediatrics, 33(1):75–110, 2013

Physical Therapy Intervention in the Neonatal

Eilish Byrne1 & June Garber2,3

KEYWORDS. Physical Therapy, Neonatal, Intervention, Therapy, NICU

INFANT-DRIVEN, FAMILY-CENTERED APPROACH

tion, October 2010). Level 1 is a medical approach in which information is provided

possible, the environment should be modified to facilitate infant success at a par-

FACILITATE CALM STATE AND MOTOR ORGANIZATION

Non-Nutritive Sucking (NNS)

relatively alert infant remains in an isolette in prone or sidelying prior to or during

Skin-to-Skin Care (SSC)

2003b). Neonates have demonstrated physiological tolerance of hydrotherapy pro-

POSITIONING AND HANDLING

Head Shaping and Musculoskeletal Integrity

Promote Comfort and Respiratory Function

Promote Skin Integrity and Provide Scar Management

Promote Contained Movement

trimester of pregnancy play an important role in fetal musculoskeletal and nervous

Provide Gentle Range of Motion as Indicated and Splinting as Needed

Facilitate Periods of Exploratory Moving

Promote Alerting and Interaction

Promoting infant alerting for various developmental tasks such as feeding,

Guided Extremity Movements

Increased Time in Upright Position

At approximately 35 weeks PMA, preterm infants typically increase their up-

Varied Developmental Positions

Enhancement of Trunk Mobility and Diaphragmatic Breathing

while nipple feeding. Consequently, fatigue as indicated by irritability, drowsiness,

FIGURE 8. This infant is in a position of semi-upright supine on a caregiver’s lap. The

Promotion of Antigravity Movements

kicking (Fallang, Saugstad, Grogaard, & Hadders-Algra, 2003a; Heathcock, Bhat,

Motor Performance (Murney & Campbell, 1998). Following analysis of videotapes

Promotion of Supine Anti-Gravity Movement

arm movement can be encouraged by a caregiver assisting the pectoral muscles

Promotion of Prone Antigravity Movements

Promotion of Antigravity Movements in Supported Sitting

RESEARCH ON MOTOR INTERVENTION IN NICU

NICU discharge that documented significantly greater motor skill improvement

Because there is a paucity of evidence on exercise programs in the NICU, clini-

the content and writing of this article.

ABOUT THE AUTHORS

Online Journal of Clinical Innovations, 3(7), 1–77.

Girolami, G. L., & Campbell, S. K. (1994). Efficacy of a neurodevelopmental treatment program

pp. 903–943). St. Louis, MO: Elsevier Saunders.

in the healthy premature neonate. Journal of Pediatrics, 151, 585–590.

You might also like