Self‐care and hand function in preschool children with unilateral or bilateral cerebral palsy: A cross‐sectional study

Abstract

AbstractAimsTo describe self‐care capabilities among children with cerebral palsy (CP) and explore associations between self‐care and hand function for children with unilateral cerebral palsy (UCP) and children with bilateral cerebral palsy (BCP) separately.MethodCross‐sectional data on self‐care capabilities (Pediatric Evaluation of Disability Inventory, PEDI), manual abilities (Manual Ability Classification System, MACS) and hand use during bimanual performance (Assisting Hand Assessment, AHA; Both Hands Assessment, BoHA) were retrieved from the Norwegian Quality and Surveillance Registry for Cerebral Palsy (NorCP). Eighty‐seven children with CP (UCP, n = 61, mean age 4 years 1 month, SD 1 year 3 months, range 56) or BCP (n = 26, mean age 4 years 4 months, SD 1 year, range 41), classified at MACS level I (n = 26), II (n = 40) or III (n = 21), were included.ResultsNo significant differences in self‐care capabilities were found between children with UCP and children with BCP. Analysis of variance showed significant differences in self‐care between MACS levels for the whole group. No significant differences in self‐care between MACS levels were observed for children with UCP (p = 0.36), but significant differences were found for those with BCP (p < 0.001). Whereas a small correlation (r = 0.3) between PEDI and AHA scores was found for children with UCP, a large correlation (r = 0.6) was found for those with BCP. Children with BCP with symmetric hand use during bimanual performance (BoHA) had higher PEDI scores than children with asymmetric hand use.ConclusionThough children with UCP and children with BCP who were classified at MACS I–III exhibited similar self‐care capabilities, the limited hand use seems to contribute differently between the two groups. The two different measures of hand use exhibit different associations with self‐care capabilities for young children with UCP and BCP, respectively, and illustrate the need to treat UCP and BCP as two distinct groups, each requiring tailored interventions according to their specific needs.