Efficacy of an Early Rhythmic Intervention in Infancy

Condition(s) studied

Investigational drug(s) / intervention(s)

Rhythmic intervention: The rhythmic intervention consists in an ecological and non-invasive intervention based on enriched auditory and musical active experience. It is based on the most recent scientific evidence in the field and provides exposure to and active synchronization with complex musical rhythms. It is thought to promote the infant's ability to recognize and process the complex rhythms of spoken language. Importantly, it taps into and empowers early auditory processing skills. The intervention includes several tasks described in the literature, for example tapping and bouncing at the beat of complex musical rhythms. The intervention takes place in small groups of infant-caregiver pairs (N=4/5) for 1 hour/week for 6 weeks.

Passive auditory stimulation: The same auditory stimulation is provided to infants, but no active tasks are proposed. Children and caregiver are entertained with motor and cognitive tasks not related to the auditory stimuli presented. The intervention takes place in small groups of infant-caregiver pairs (N=4/5) for 1 hour/week for 6 weeks.

Study summary

The present project develops from a wide research line aiming at identifying very early electrophysiological risk markers for neurodevelopmental disorders. Long-term goals of the study include the characterization of language/learning developmental trajectories in children at high risk for language disorders and the implementation of ecological interventions based on enriched auditory experience to be employed to these children in an attempt to modify their atypical developmental trajectory before the emergence and crystallization of any behavioural symptoms and within the early period of known maximum cerebral plasticity.

Specifically, the main aim of this study is the development and implementation of an innovative and ecological early intervention based on environmental auditory enrichment (labelled "rhythmic intervention"). This intervention is tested both on a sample of typically developing infants and on a sample of infants at high familial risk for language disorders during a time span between 7 and 9 months of age. The efficacy of the intervention is tested on the electrophysiological markers tested before and after the intervention activities and on the linguistic outcomes within a longitudinal approach. The efficacy of such an intervention is compared to the spontaneous development observed in comparable groups of infants with and without familial risk for language disorders. In addition, only in a group of typically developing infants, a control intervention providing passive exposure to the same auditory stimulation is tested, in order to verify the specific contribution of the active participation of the children to the intervention.

The investigators hypothesize that the rhythmic intervention may modify the electrophysiological markers underlying auditory processing and the linguistic skills of all children, with a larger increase in infants at familial risk for language disorders who are specifically impaired in such skills.

Eligibility

Primary outcome measure(s)

• Electrophysiological markers in a task tapping neural entrainment administered immediately after the end on the intervention (or at comparable age). — Age 10-11 months.
  Early neural mechanisms supporting speech and acoustic perception are recorded in response to non-speech and speech rhythmic stimuli modulated at different rates. Neural entrainment to the incoming rhythms is measured in the form of peaks emerging from the EEG spectrum at frequencies corresponding to the rhythm envelope.
• Electrophysiological markers in a task tapping neural entrainment administered at age 18 months. — Age 18 months.
  Early neural mechanisms supporting speech and acoustic perception are recorded in response to non-speech and speech rhythmic stimuli modulated at different rates. Neural entrainment to the incoming rhythms is measured in the form of peaks emerging from the EEG spectrum at frequencies corresponding to the rhythm envelope.
• Electrophysiological markers (obligatory peak) in a non-speech multi-feature oddball paradigm administered at age 12 months. — Age 12 months
  In the non-speech multi-feature paradigm, pairs of complex tones are presented at a rapid rate (70ms inter-stimulus interval) and stimuli differing in either frequency or duration serve as deviants. Latency of the obligatory peak (P1/P2) are computed.
• Electrophysiological markers (MisMatch Response) in a non-speech multi-feature oddball paradigm administered at age 12 months. — Age 12 months
  In the non-speech multi-feature paradigm, pairs of complex tones are presented at a rapid rate (70ms inter-stimulus interval) and stimuli differing in either frequency or duration serve as deviants. Mean amplitude of the MisMatch Response is computed.
• Electrophysiological markers (obligatory peak) in a non-speech multi-feature oddball paradigm administered at age 24 months. — Age 24 months
  In the non-speech multi-feature paradigm, pairs of complex tones are presented at a rapid rate (70ms inter-stimulus interval) and stimuli differing in either frequency or duration serve as deviants. Latency of the obligatory peak (P1/P2) are computed.
• Electrophysiological markers (Mismatch Response) in a non-speech multi-feature oddball paradigm administered at age 24 months. — Age 24 months
  In the non-speech multi-feature paradigm, pairs of complex tones are presented at a rapid rate (70ms inter-stimulus interval) and stimuli differing in either frequency or duration serve as deviants. Mean amplitude of the MisMatch Response is computed.

Trial sites (1)

More IRCCS Eugenio Medea trials in Italy

Other trials for the same condition