Reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) When Used via Telehealth for Neurodevelopmentally High-Risk Infants

To assess the reliability of the Alberta Infant Motor Scale (AIMS) when conducted <i>via</i> recorded telehealth sessions by novice and expert raters. Ten assessors (six novice, four expert) independently rated recorded telehealth assessments of 23 neurodevelopmentally high-risk infants twice. Inter- and intra-rater reliability of subscale scores, total score and percentile rankings were determined. AIMS total score inter-rater reliability was excellent across all raters (ICC = 0.92–0.96). Inter-rater-reliability across prone, supine and sitting subscale scores was excellent (ICC = 0.90–0.96) but variable for standing subscale (ICC = 0.06–0.65). Novice total score intra-rater reliability was variable (ICC = 0.45–0.94); expert reliability was excellent (ICC = 0.93–1.00). Recording to real-time telehealth assessment had excellent intra-rater reliability (ICC = 0.96). Time taken to complete the assessment was comparable to a face-to-face assessment (mean: 14.9 min). Novices paused/replayed each video more than experts (2.2 compared to 1.0 in Time 1; and 1.0 compared to 0.5 in Time 2). The AIMS assessment is reliable when undertaken <i>via</i> telehealth consultation. Time taken to complete the assessment is comparable to a face-to-face assessment. Novice inter-rater reliability was similar to experts. Training and the ability to pause/review infant motor performance may explain the accuracy achieved.