Everyday positioning experience in typically developing infants and infants with or at risk for cerebral palsy.
Kari S Kretch
PMID 41936142WHAT IT FOUND
Infants with or at risk for CP spent more of the day on their back and much less standing than typically developing peers: at 12 months, 40% versus 14% of the day supine, and 8% versus 29% standing.
Motor milestone delays did not explain it.
Key findings
01As infants got older they spent less time on their back, on their front or suspended and more time sitting and standing. Each extra month of age made being supine or prone 0.84 times as likely and standing 1.41 times as likely.
02Infants with or at risk for CP were 2.53 times as likely to be supine, 0.71 times as likely to be sitting and 0.25 times as likely to be standing as typically developing infants of the same age, and were 1.48 times as likely to be supported by an adult rather than supporting themselves.
03Adding whether the infant could crawl, sit or pull to stand to the models did not remove the group differences, so milestone delay alone does not explain how these infants spend their days.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 13 of the 25 infants in the CP group had a confirmed diagnosis when the study ran; the rest had brain injury, neurological concerns or other risk factors, and 3 were diagnosed later. Results for the confirmed group come from a very small number of infants. Motor skills were reported by parents as yes/no milestones (can your child sit unsupported for 30 seconds, crawl, pull to stand, walk). That misses subtler differences in postural control, which the authors think may be why the group differences did not disappear. Position was reported by caregivers at the moment of a text prompt rather than observed directly, so what caregivers noticed and how they read the categories shapes the data. Parent reports elsewhere overestimated tummy time by 250% compared with full-day video. To take part, a family needed one main caregiver at home at least four days a week and a smartphone, which leaves out families using group childcare. The study only watched what infants did; it cannot show whether positioning shapes development, whether development shapes positioning, or whether changing positioning changes anything.
Declared interests
The article text supplied contains no funding statement and no competing-interest declaration.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read these numbers as proof that more upright time improves development. The study only recorded where infants were positioned across the day, so it cannot show cause and effect, and the authors state that the relationship probably runs both ways.
Summarised by AI from the full paper, without a clinician reviewing it. Check it against the source before it changes what you do. Read it on PubMed →