Diagnostic preferences include discussion of etiology for adults with cerebral palsy and their caregivers

Causation in cerebral palsy: Parental beliefs and associated emotions

AIM

To better understand parents' beliefs about causation in cerebral palsy (CP) and the emotions related to those beliefs.

METHOD

We surveyed 226 parents of children with CP aged 1 to 18 years, recruited from the Victorian Cerebral Palsy Register, to evaluate their beliefs about the causes of CP, including genetic causes, causes specific to their own child, and their attitudes and emotions in relation to these.

RESULTS

Although 92% of participants reported that understanding the causes of their child's CP was important, uncertainty about the cause was expressed by 13%. The most frequently endorsed causal factors, in general and in their own child respectively, were intrapartum hypoxia (81%, 36%) or brain damage (69%, 22%), brain damage during pregnancy (73%, 28%), and preterm birth (66%, 28%). Genetic causes were deemed relevant by 13% of participants and hospital or professional error by 16%. Parents shared related feelings of anger (59%), sadness (80%), guilt (61%), and confusion (53%); parental anger was more likely when their child's CP was attributed to intrapartum events.

INTERPRETATION

Substantial parental interest in understanding the causes of CP, together with uncertainty about the causes, parents' causal attributions, and significant emotional sequelae, highlight a strong need for provision of information and support for families of children recently diagnosed with CP.

WHAT THIS PAPER ADDS

Understanding the causes of their child's cerebral palsy (CP) was important to parents. Parents most often endorsed intrapartum factors as a cause of CP. Parents reported experiencing strong emotions about the causes of their child's CP.

Neonatal well-being and timing of brain injury in persons with cerebral palsy born at term or late preterm

AIM

To describe the distribution of neuroimaging patterns in a term/late preterm population-based cohort with cerebral palsy (CP), ascertain associations between neuroimaging patterns and neonatal well-being, estimate the proportion with antenatal or perinatal timing of neuropathology, and apply this information to the understanding of common mechanisms of brain injury and causal pathways.

METHOD

The cohort for this observational study comprised 1348 persons born between 1999 and 2017 in Victoria, Australia. Using algorithms designed for the study, neonatal well-being and timing of brain injury were tabulated for the whole cohort and across neuroimaging patterns and birth epochs.

RESULTS

Clinical and demographic profiles, neonatal well-being, and timing of brain injury differed across neuroimaging patterns. An estimated 57% of the cohort had a complicated neonatal period. Timing of brain injury was antenatal in 57% and perinatal in 41%. A decrease in the relative proportions of perinatal timing of brain injury was observed over a period when the rates of CP in live births at term decreased.

INTERPRETATION

This study begins to bridge the knowledge gap about causation in CP, moving towards better description of the main mechanisms of brain injury and their contribution within CP cohorts, and facilitating the ability to monitor changes over time and the success of preventive measures.

Uncertainties regarding cerebral palsy diagnosis: opportunities to operationalize the consensus definition

Background and Objectives

Cerebral palsy (CP), the most common motor disability of childhood, is variably diagnosed. We hypothesized that child neurologists and neurodevelopmentalists, often on the frontlines of CP diagnosis in North America, harbor uncertainties regarding the practical application of the most recent CP consensus definition from 2006.

Methods

We conducted a cross-sectional survey of child neurologists and neurodevelopmentalists at the 2022 Child Neurology Society Annual Meeting. Attendees were provided the 2006 CP consensus definition and asked whether they had any uncertainties about the practical application of the definition across four hypothetical clinical vignettes.

Results

Of 230 attendees, 164 responded to the closing survey questions (71%). 145/164 (88%) expressed at least one uncertainty regarding the clinical application of the 2006 definition. Overwhelmingly, these areas of uncertainty focused on: 1) Age, both with regards to the minimum age of diagnosis and the maximum age of brain disturbance or motor symptom onset, (67/164, 41%), and 2) Interpretation of the term "non-progressive" (48/164, 29%). The vast majority of respondents (157/164, 96%) answered 'Yes' to the question: Do you think we should revise the 2006 consensus definition of CP?

Discussion

We propose that the uncertainties we identified could be addressed by operationalizing the 2006 consensus definition to support a more uniform CP diagnosis. To address the most common CP diagnostic uncertainties we identified, we propose 3 points of clarification based on the available literature: 1) Motor symptoms/signs should be present by 2 years old; 2) CP can and should be diagnosed as early as possible, even if activity limitation is not yet present, if motor symptoms/signs can be reasonably predicted to yield activity limitation (e.g. by using standardized examination instruments, Brain MRI, and a suggestive clinical history); and 3) The clinical motor disability phenotype should be non-progressive through 5 years old. We anticipate that operationalizing the 2006 definition of CP in this manner could clarify the uncertainties we identified among child neurologists and neurodevelopmentalists and reduce the diagnostic variability that currently exists.

What does an aetiological diagnosis actually mean?

This commentary is on the original article by Aravamuthan et al. on pages 723–733 of this issue.