29 March 2025 : Clinical Research
The Role of the Vojta Method in Diagnosing and Enhancing Motor Skills in Preterm Infants: A Prospective Open-Label Controlled Study
Agata Trafalska
ABCDEF 1, Małgorzata Paprocka-Borowicz ABCDEFG 1*
DOI: 10.12659/MSM.945495
Med Sci Monit 2025; 31:e945495
Table 1 Evaluation of positioning responses by the Vojta method on the day of the initial examination (baseline) in groups of preterm infants differing in gestational age, and results of comparisons.
| Features (variable) | Premature babies | Control group | P | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group 1 | Group 2 | Group 3 | |||||||
| N=49 | N=51 | N=50 | N=50 | ||||||
| Age on the day of the examination (months) | 4 [3; 5] | 3 [2; 5] | 3 [2; 4] | 3.5 [3; 4] | 0.007 | ||||
| Vojta reflex | 0.061 | ||||||||
| Standard | 29 | 59.2% | 23 | 45.1% | 17 | 34.0% | 19 | 38.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 20 | 40.8% | 28 | 54.9% | 33 | 66.0% | 31 | 62.0% | |
| Traction test | 0.013 | ||||||||
| Standard | 29 | 59.2% | 23 | 45.1% | 35 | 70.0% | 37 | 74.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 20 | 40.8% | 28 | 54.9% | 15 | 30.0% | 13 | 26.0% | |
| Peiper-Isbert vertical suspension reflex | 0.003 | ||||||||
| Standard | 0 | 0.0% | 2 | 3.9% | 28 | 56.0% | 27 | 54.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 49 | 100.0% | 49 | 96.1% | 22 | 44.0% | 23 | 46.0% | |
| Collis’ vertical suspension reflex | <0.001 | ||||||||
| Standard | 4 | 8.2% | 6 | 11.8% | 19 | 38.0% | 28 | 56.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 45 | 91.8% | 45 | 88.2% | 31 | 62.0% | 22 | 44.0% | |
| Collis’ horizontal suspension reflex | <0.001 | ||||||||
| Standard | 2 | 4.1% | 6 | 11.8% | 12 | 24.0% | 22 | 44.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 47 | 95.9% | 45 | 88.2% | 38 | 76.0% | 28 | 56.0% | |
| Landau reflex | <0.001 | ||||||||
| Standard | 0 | 0.0% | 0 | 0.0% | 35 | 70.0% | 33 | 66.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 49 | 100.0% | 51 | 100.0% | 15 | 30.0% | 17 | 34.0% | |
| Axillary suspension reflex | 0.062 | ||||||||
| Standard | 20 | 40.8% | 23 | 45.1% | 33 | 66.0% | 24 | 48.0% | |
| Abnormal response | 29 | 59.2% | 28 | 54.9% | 17 | 34.0% | 26 | 52.0% | |
| -values for categorical variables (eg, standard vs abnormal response) were calculated using Pearson’s chi-square test; -values for continuous variables (eg, age on the day of examination) were calculated using the Kruskal-Wallis test due to non-normal distribution. | |||||||||