Effect Of Parenting Factors On Cognitive Development In Infants

Objectives: The physical and brain development in infancy is the fastest, this study intends to explore the effect of birth weight, gestational age, delivery mode, breastfeeding, temperament type and anemia on the infant cognitive development.Methods: In accordance with the principle of informed consent and voluntary, choose 3-12 months outpatient infant from children’s health care center in Women & Children hospital of Yan-Cheng as the research object from January to June in 2015. Assesses the cognitive development of infant on CM, GM, FM, CG and PS areas by the ASQ-3 and investigates the related influencing factors at the same time.Results:(1) The cognitive development in full term infant is superior to premature. In 3~ mouth group, the development of full term infant is superior to premature in CM, GM, FM, CG and PS areas(?2 is 59.135, 59.135, 28.562, 31.305 and 27.574 respectively, P<0.05). In 5~ mouth group, the development of full term infant is superior to premature in CM, FM and CG areas(?2 is 9.186, 18.885, and 13.162 respectively, P<0.05). In 7~ mouth group, the development of full term infant is superior to premature in FM and CG areas(?2 is 8.977 and 8.977 respectively, P<0.05). In 9~ mouth group, the development of full term infant is superior to premature in FM area(?2=5.588, P<0.05). The Logistic regression shows that: In 3~ mouth group, the development of premature is inferior to full term infant in CM, GM, FM, CG and PS areas(OR is 5.578, 5.578, 5.578, 8.162 and 7.348 respectively, P<0.05). In 5~ mouth group, the development of premature is inferior to full term infant in CM, FM and CG areas(OR is 3.954, 3.954 and 3.954 respectively, P<0.05). In 7~ mouth group, the development of premature is inferior to full term infant in CM, FM and CG areas(OR is 4.299, 5.867 and 8.364 respectively, P<0.05). In 9~ mouth group, the development of premature is inferior to full term infant in FM area(OR = 10.20, P<0.05).(2) Low birth weight leads to adverse cognitive development in infant. At CM area, in 3~ mouth and 5~ mouth group, the development of LBW is inferior to NBW(?2 is 30.604 and 19.136 respectively, P<0.05), and also inferior to macrosomia(?2 is 14.807, P<0.05 and P=0.042), no significant difference between macrosomia and NBW(?2 is 0.075 and 1.569 respectively, P>0.05). At GM area, in 3~ mouth group, the development of LBW is inferior to NBW(?2=27.849, P<0.05), and also inferior to macrosomia(?2=6.939, P<0.05), no significant difference between macrosomia and NBW(?2=1.627, P>0.05). At FM area, in 3~ mouth, 5~ mouth and 7~ mouth group, the development of LBW is inferior to NBW(?2 is 12.035, 17.445 and 9.727 respectively, P<0.05), and also inferior to macrosomia(?2=5.240, P<0.05, and P=0.007 and P=0.007), no significant difference between macrosomia and NBW(?2 is 0.023, 0.000 and 0.559 respectively, P> 0.05). At CG area, in 3~ mouth, 5~ mouth, 7~ mouth and 9~ mouth group, the development of LBW is inferior to NBW(?2 is 17.958, 10.552, 14.529 respectively, P<0.05 and P=0.009), no significant difference between macrosomia and NBW(?2 is 0.089, 1.131, 0.257 and 0.0001, respectively, P>0.05), and also inferior to macrosomia except 9~ mouth group(?2 is 0.089, 1.131, 0.257 and 0.000 respectively, P>0.05). At PS area, in 3~ mouth group, the development of LBW is inferior to NBW(?2=25.308, P<0.05), and also inferior to macrosomia(?2=10.582, P<0.05), no significant difference between macrosomia and NBW(?2=10.582, P>0.05). The Logistic regression shows that: In 3~ mouth group, the development of LBW is worse in CM, GM, FM, CG and PS areas(OR is 2.074, 1.085, 2.180, 2.127 and 1.093 respectively, P<0.05). In 5~ mouth group, the development of LBW is worse in CM, FM and CG areas(OR is 0.099, 0.001 and 0.160 respectively, P<0.05). In 7~ mouth group, the development of LBW is worse in CM, FM and CG areas(OR is 0.100, 0.067 and 5.873 respectively, P<0.05). In 9~ mouth group, the development of LBW is worse in FM area(OR=0.060, P<0.05).(3) Exclusive breastfeeding can promote infant cognitive development. In 3~ mouth group, the development of breastfeeding group is superior to mixed and formula feeding group in CM area(q is 3.430 and 2.567 respectively, P<0.05) and PS area(q is 4.291 and 2.597 respectively, P<0.05). In 5~ mouth group, the development of breastfeeding group is superior to mixed and formula feeding group in FM area(q is 6.846 and 4.062 respectively, P<0.05) and CG area(q is 6.982 and 3.546 respectively, P<0.05). In 7~ mouth group, the development of breastfeeding group is superior to mixed and formula feeding group in GM area(q is 4.891 and 3.839 respectively, P<0.05) and PS area(q is 4.194 and 3.987 respectively, P<0.05).(4) The cognitive development in E-type temperament infant is superior to other temperament types. In 7~ mouth group, the risk of being GM development delay in D-type, S-type and I-type is higher than in E-type(OR is 16.989, 4.505 and 3.456 respectively, P<0.05), and also FM development delay(OR is 12.908, 7.578 and 2.971 respectively, P<0.05). In 11-12 mouth group, at GM area, the difference among the four temperament types is significant(F=3.036, P<0.05).(5) Anemia leads to adverse cognitive development in infant. In 7~ mouth and 9~ mouth group, GM development in anemia infant is inferior to health infant(t is 3,126 and 4.405, P<0.05). In 5~ mouth and 11-12 mouth group, CG development in anemia infant is inferior to health infant(t is 3,236 and 4.568, P<0.05).Conclusion:(1) The cognitive development in full term infant is superior to premature.(2) Low birth weight leads to adverse cognitive development in infant.(3) Exclusive breastfeeding can promote infant cognitive development.(4) The cognitive development in E-type temperament infant is superior to other temperament types.(5) Anemia leads to adverse cognitive development in infant.