IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v17y2020i7p2612-d343984.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Infant Cranial Deformity: Cranial Helmet Therapy or Physiotherapy?

Author

Listed:
  • Josefa González-Santos

    (Department of Health Sciences, Cavidito Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain)

  • Jerónimo J. González-Bernal

    (Department of Health Sciences, Cavidito Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain)

  • Raquel De-la-Fuente Anuncibay

    (Department of Educational Sciences, Discondu Research Team, Educational Research Centre, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain)

  • Raúl Soto-Cámara

    (Department of Health Sciences, Cavidito Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain)

  • Esther Cubo

    (Department of Health Sciences, Cavidito Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Burgos, 09001 Burgos, Spain)

  • José M. Aguilar-Parra

    (Department of Psychology, Hum 878 Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain)

  • Rubén Trigueros

    (Department of Language and Education, University of Antonio de Nebrija, 28015 Madrid, Spain)

  • Remedios López-Liria

    (Department of Nursing Science, Physiotherapy and Medicine, Hum 498 Research Team, Health Research Centre, University of Almería, 04120 Almería, Spain)

Abstract

Objective : To compare cranial helmet therapy (CHT) and physiotherapy (PT) for the effective treatment of positional plagiocephaly in infants in terms of improving functional recovery. Methods: This was a prospective cohort study involving 48 infants between 5–10 months of age with cranial deformities. The Cranial Vault Asymmetry Index (CVAI) and the Brunet–Lezine scale were calculated at the initiation of the study and after 40 treatment sessions. Results : The infants’ first assessment showed a delay in overall development areas with a global developmental quotient (DQ) (posture, coordination, sociability, and language) of 80.15. Although developmental improvements were observed in both groups in the Brunet–Lezine scale after treatment, the MANCOVA test showed no significant differences (F(5) = 0.82, p = 0.506, eta 2 = 0.09). The CVAI reduced to 4.07% during the final evaluation in the cranial helmet group and 5.85% in the physiotherapy group without any significant differences between the two therapies ( p = 0.70). Conclusions : No statistically significant differences were found between CHT and PT. After treatment, improvements from baseline measurements were observed in each of the readings of cranial deformity.

Suggested Citation

  • Josefa González-Santos & Jerónimo J. González-Bernal & Raquel De-la-Fuente Anuncibay & Raúl Soto-Cámara & Esther Cubo & José M. Aguilar-Parra & Rubén Trigueros & Remedios López-Liria, 2020. "Infant Cranial Deformity: Cranial Helmet Therapy or Physiotherapy?," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 17(7), pages 1-9, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2612-:d:343984
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2612/pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/17/7/2612/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Josefa González-Santos & Jerónimo J. González-Bernal & Raquel De-la-Fuente-Anuncibay & José M. Aguilar-Parra & Rubén Trigueros & Raúl Soto-Cámara & Remedios López-Liria, 2020. "A Prospective Study of Cranial Deformity and Delayed Development in Children," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(5), pages 1-9, March.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Jacek Wilczyński & Anita Sowińska & Marta Mierzwa-Molenda, 2022. "Physiotherapy as a Specific and Purposeful Form of Physical Activity in Children with Idiopathic Body Asymmetry," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(22), pages 1-9, November.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:17:y:2020:i:7:p:2612-:d:343984. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.