Association between mode of delivery and failure of neonatal acoustic emission test: a retrospective analysis

Analysis of the Referral Rates of Newborn Hearing Screening Test According to Childbirth Delivery Methods in Neonatal Care Units

It is known that neonates born by cesarean delivery (CD) may have higher referral rates than those born by vaginal delivery (VD) for newborn hearing screening (NHS). False-positive NHS results can increase costs and parental anxiety. This study analyzed the differences in NHS referral rates according to delivery methods in Level I, II, and III neonatal care units. A retrospective chart review was done for 2322 infants (4644 ears) with delivery records who underwent NHS between 2004 and 2017. The first NHS was performed immediately before discharge when the infant was in good condition via the automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) or automated otoacoustic emissions (AOAE). There were 98 neonates (196 ears) who underwent both AABR and AOAE simultaneously as the first NHS, 30 of which failed. We used a total of 4810 ears in this analysis. Of all enrolled ears, 2075 ears were of neonates born by CD, and 2735 ears were of neonates born by VD. A total of 2460 ears were from patients in Level III neonatal intensive care units (NICU) and 2350 ears were from Level I and II neonatal care units. The overall referral rate was higher in infants born via CD (4.5%) than VD (3.2%). In Level I and II neonatal intensive care units, the referral rate was significantly higher in those born via CD (3.0%) than via VD (1.4%). Further, based on the screening method, AABR (75.8%) was more frequently used than AOAE (24.2%), thereby revealing AABR’s higher referral rate in CD (2.9%) than in VD (1.2%). The referral rate of infants who underwent the NHS within three days of birth was higher in the CD group (3.0%) than in the VD group (1.3%). There was no significant difference in the referral rate depending on the delivery method when infants were hospitalized for more than four days or hospitalized in the NICU. The referral rate according to the delivery methods was significantly higher when the NHS test was performed for healthy newborns in the Level I and II neonatal care units born by CD within 72 h using AABR. Therefore, we recommend that the hearing screening test for newborns delivered by cesarean section be performed after 72 h of age. The results of this study may reduce the false-positive NHS results, unnecessary further tests, and parental anxiety.

The effects of mode of delivery, maternal age, birth weight, gender and family history on screening hearing results: A cross sectional study

Introduction

Congenital hearing impairment is one of the principal issues that make distress to families especially those with a family history of hearing problems. Early detection of hearing impairment can make a difference regarding cognitive, attention, learning, speech, and social and emotional development of babies. Otoacoustic test emission is a very common screening test that can be used to pick up early cases and relieve family stress. We tried to evaluate the factors that may disrupt our results regarding the OAE test.

Methods

A cross-sectional study included infants who were admitted to the nursery unit alone. Infants who were admitted to the NICU unit, infants with craniofacial anomalies, infants with vernix in the external auditory canal, and Infants with Stigmata associated with a syndrome known to include a sensorineural hearing loss were excluded from the study. Both transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) with distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) Screening tests were performed by the same professional audiologist experienced in neonatal screening.

Results

A total of 1413 newborns (733 males and 680 females) were included in the study. Among them, 1368 babies (96.8%) passed the first OAE in both ears, while 45 babies (3.2%) didn't pass the first OAE in one or both ears.Significant correlations between the female gender and family history of congenital hearing loss with failure of the first OAE test results. Moreover, vaginal delivery (VD) infants had a 1.5-fold higher failure rates of first OAE test screening results in comparison to caesarian delivery (CD) infants.

Conclusion

Our study demonstrated higher failure rates of the first OAE in female infants, vaginal delivery infants, and infants with a family history of hearing impairment. It is recommended to postpone the first phase of hearing screening for those infants until the first scheduled vaccine appointment to achieve higher compliance attendance, and decrease family stress associated with false-negative results of the test.

•

Hearing impairment is a stressful condition that disturbs family quality of life.

•

Early detection of hearing impairment can make a difference in child development.

•

Otoacoustic test emission is a screening test with considerable reliability.

•

Early Otoacoustic test can have false negative results in specific condition.

•

Postpone the first phase of hearing screening decrease the family stress.

Perinatal factors influencing the neonatal hearing screening results

Background

Previous studies have indicated that the majority of cases with “failed” results related to transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (OAE) test have the normal hearing. The present study aimed to assess the possible relationships between perinatal factors and the false-positive OAE results.

Methods

A case-control study was carried out in an Iranian Hospital in 2020. Based on the OAE results on the first day of life, newborns were divided into 2 groups; Control group included subjects with “Pass” OAE results. Every neonate with “Fail” OAE result was referred for auditory brainstem response (ABR). Neonates with bilateral fail OAE but normal ABR results (false-positive OAE) were considered as the case group. All recorded data were analyzed to assess the possible correlations between maternal/neonatal factors and the false-positive OAE results.

Results

One hundred and eighty-one neonates entered the study. Of all included neonates, 87 (48.1%) cases showed bilateral fail OAE and 94 (51.9%) subjects passed the OAE test. Normal ABR results (false-positive OAE) were observed in all cases with bilateral fail OAE. Comparisons of variables affecting the OAE results showed that of all perinatal factors, neonate’s sex (p = 0.046) and cesarean section (p = 0.003) were the only influencing factors that increased the risk of false-positive OAE results.

Conclusion

Based on the results, the cesarean section delivery and neonate’s male sex increased the risk of false-positive results related to OAE test. Implementing other screening tests such as ABR or Automated ABR as the initial screening test could be suggested for such cases.

Effect of delivery mode on neonate auditory brainstem responses to air- and bone-conducted stimuli

OBJECTIVES

The object of this study was to examine if caesarean section delivered neonates have different middle ear function relative to neonates with vaginal delivery.

METHODS

Auditory brainstem responses (ABRs) were examined in caesarean section delivered (n = 23) and vaginally delivered (n = 29) neonates. ABRs were also evoked with air- and bone-conducted stimuli (i.e., clicks and CE-Chirps) and presented at a screening intensity level (i.e., 30 dB nHL). Wave V latencies and amplitudes were examined as a function of mode of delivery and stimuli.

RESULTS

Statistically significant longer wave V latencies evoked with air-conducted stimuli were seen in caesarean section delivered neonates (p = .042). There was no statistically significant difference in wave V latencies with bone-conducted stimuli among the two groups of neonates (p = .42). There were no significant differences in wave V amplitude between neonates with caesarean section and vaginal delivery for air-conducted (p = .42) stimuli. Wave V amplitudes were not significantly different as a function of mode of delivery with CE-Chirp stimulus (p = .41). Wave V amplitudes were significantly larger for the caesarean section delivered neonates with the bone-conducted click stimulus (p = .036).

CONCLUSIONS

The ABR wave V latency disparity with air- and bone-conducted stimuli support the notion that differences in middle ear function exist between the two groups of newborns. It was speculated that delayed fluid resorption in the middle ear exists in neonates with caesarean section delivery compared to those with vaginal delivery.

Risk indicators for hearing loss and language acquisition and their relationship with socioeconomic, demographic and obstetric variables in preterm and term babies

PURPOSE

To compare the frequency of risk indicators in preterm and full-term babies; to analyze the possible relationships among the presence of risk for hearing loss with language acquisition and socioeconomic, demographic and obstetric variables.

METHODS

This is a longitudinal cohort study, with a sample of 87 babies. Gestational, obstetric and sociodemographic data were collected from mothers and babies. The socioeconomic classification status of the families were classified using the Brazilian Criteria for Economic Classification. The risk for language was assessed using the Language Acquisition Enunciation Signs and the Denver II test. The data were analyzed using the STATISTICA 9.1 software, using the chi-square and the Mann-Whitney U tests and simple and multiple linear regression models.

RESULTS

Permanence in a neonatal intensive care (65.52%), ototoxic (48.28%), mechanical ventilation (39.66%) and hyperbilirubinemia (46.55%) were the more frequent risk indicators in the sample. Regarding socioeconomic, demographic and obstetric factors, there was a correlation among prenatal care, gestational age, birth weight, feeding with hearing risk. Acquisition and development of language showed statistical significance with varicella, HIV, Apgar score and birth weight >1500 grams.

CONCLUSION

Preterm babies showed higher frequency of risk indicators compared to full-term babies. Among environmental factors, prenatal care, which interferes in the outcome of gestational age, birth weight, Apgar score and presence of infectious diseases, as well as feeding, emerged as significant factors related to hearing and language acquisition. Prematurity was the relevant biological factor related to hearing and language risk.

Effects of vaginal birth versus caesarean section on hearing screening results in a large series from the Aegean region

Objective: To evaluate the effects of caesarian section (CS) versus vaginal birth (VB) delivery techniques on results from neonatal hearing screening tests (NHSTs).Design: Retrospective analysis.Study sample: A total of 10,767 neonates divided into two groups according to delivery technique underwent NHSTs. Those who failed TEOAE or AABR were sent for diagnostic ABR examination.Results: A total of 5620 of 6044 (92.9%) of the neonates in the CS group passed the TEOAE test bilaterally and 424 (7.1%) failed either unilaterally or bilaterally. In the VB group, 4496 of 4723 (95.1%) neonates passed the TEOAE test bilaterally, while the remaining 227 (4.9%) failed the test either unilaterally or bilaterally. Bilateral passing rate of TEOAE test results was significantly higher in the VB group than the CS group (p < 0.05). The AABR failure rate (unilaterally or bilaterally) was 1% in the CS group, which was significantly higher than that in the VB group (0.6%). Diagnostic ABR bilateral pass rate was not statistically different between the groups.Conclusions: Delivery method was shown to affect the results of NHSTs. We found that the rates of failing the TEOAE and screening AABR examinations were higher among neonates born by CS compared to VB.

Effects on developmental outcomes after cesarean birth versus vaginal birth in Chinese children aged 1-59 months: a cross-sectional community-based survey

OBJECTIVE

It is controversial whether the mode of delivery is associated with developmental outcome, and little was known about growth and development of cesarean children in poor rural areas in China. We aim to measure the development of both cesarean and vaginal-delivered children by Ages and Stages Questionnaires (ASQ) and explore the association between mode of delivery and developmental outcome in poor rural areas in China.

METHODS

Data were collected from a cross-sectional community-based survey, which recruited 1,755 vaginal delivered and cesarean children ages 1 to 59 months in eight counties of China. Caregivers of those children completed the Chinese version of ASQ-3 (ASQ-C) while physical examination andquestionnaires on socio-demographic and neonatal characteristics were conducted. Multivariate logistic regressions were used to measure the association between developmental delay and mode of delivery as well as each socio-demographic factor, respectively, after adjusting other socio-demographic characteristics.

RESULTS

The prevalence of suspected overall developmental delay was 23.4% in the cesarean group, compared with 21.3% in the vaginal delivered group, yet without statistical difference (p < 0.05). Developmental delay was also not significantly different between cesarean and vaginal delivered group in five ASQ domains of communication (7.7% vs. 7.8%, p = 0.949), fine motor (7.0% vs. 6.1%, p = 0.538), gross motor (8.5% vs. 6.4%, p = 0.154), problem solving (7.2% vs. 6.7%, p = 0.722) and personal social (8.0% vs. 7.9%, p = 0.960).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings suggest that cesarean delivery does not increase or decrease the risk of suspected developmental in children delay as compared with vaginal delivery.

Detection of hearing loss in newborns: Definition of a screening strategy in Bogotá, Colombia

OBJECTIVE

To describe the results from the hearing screening protocol adopted in a Hospital in Colombia emphasizing the importance of performing screening on an outpatient basis, when the newborn is more than 24 h old.

METHODS

A prospective study at Hospital Universitario San Ignacio in Bogota, Colombia was carried out, from May 1st, 2016 to Nov 30^th, 2017, the study sample included 2.088 newborns examined using transient otoacoustic emissions.

RESULTS

We obtained written consent from the parents of 1.523 newborns and 24 individuals (1.6%) failed the first stage of the screening, nine cases unilateral and 15 bilateral. A total of nine neonates (0,6%) failed the second screening test, six cases unilateral and three bilateral. Four (0,3%) did not return to the second test. Our false altered screening rate was 0.7%.

CONCLUSIONS

In a developing country with limited human and economic resources, in which newborn early discharge is the norm, a newborn hearing screening program linked to infants' check-ups, that uses otoacoustic emissions after 48 h of life, seems a feasible option compare to the standard US protocol aiming to conduct hearing screening prior to discharge.

The Effect of Mode of Delivery on Newborn Hearing Screening Results

Objective

Congenital hearing loss is one of the most important public health problems with a frequency of about 1-6 per 1000 live births all over the world. Although neonatal hearing screening tests are important for the timely detection and rehabilitation of hearing loss, determining the factors that may affect the screening results will contribute greatly to the development of screening programs. In this study, the effects of the modes of delivery on the results of tests in the screening program was investigated.

Methods

In this study, the results of 10.575 newborns who were screened according to the National Neonatal Hearing Screening Protocol between January 2013 and May 2017 were evaluated. The screening test results of 2.653 newborns were examined retrospectively according to the type of delivery after candidates were excluded according to the exclusion criteria and risk factors for hearing loss. Of these newborns, 1.571 (59.2%) were born by normal delivery and 1.082 (40.8%) by cesarean section. Screening test results were analyzed using Pearson's Chi-square test.

Results

No statistically significant difference was observed among the 2.653 neonatal hearing screening test results in terms of mode of delivery (p>0.05). In both delivery modes, the rate of false positive was found to be high (81.9%) in the first hearing screening test of newborns, and this rate decreased in the second screening test (14.5%).

Conclusion

The mode of delivery has no significant effect on the neonatal hearing screening results; however, the observation that neonates had been more successful in the second screening test in both groups suggests that the test protocol should be re-evaluated in terms of timing.

Age and Other Factors Affecting the Outcome of AABR Screening in Neonates

BACKGROUND

Although the utility of universal newborn hearing screening is undisputed, testing protocols vary. In particular, the impact of the infant's age at the time of automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) screening has not been well studied.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective review of newborn hearing screening data in 6817 low-risk, term and late-preterm newborns at our large, urban, academic medical center for a 1-year period to analyze the impact of age and other factors on the screening failure rate and referral for diagnostic testing.

RESULTS

AABR screening failure rates decreased with postnatal age over the first 48 hours; 13.3% failed at <24 hours versus 3.8% at ≥48 hours (P < .0001). Infants who were initially tested at ≥36 hours failed repeat testing more often than those who were tested at <36 hours (11.5% vs 18.9%; P = .03). Other factors that were associated with failure included being a boy and of a race other than white. Sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) was diagnosed in 18.6% of infants who failed their final screening at ≥48 hours compared with 2.8% of those whose final screening occurred earlier (P = .03). SNHL was more likely in infants who failed their first screening bilaterally (21.2%) than unilaterally (4.4%); P = .03).

CONCLUSIONS

Among healthy newborns, delaying AABR screening in the first 48 hours minimized failure rates. SNHL was 6 times as likely in infants who failed their final screening at ≥48 hours compared with those who were screened at <48 hours of age. In our study, we offer guidance for nursery directors and audiologists who determine hearing screening protocols and counsel families about results.

Risk Factors for Failed Newborn Otoacoustic Emissions Hearing Screen

Objective To identify any socioeconomic, demographic, neonatal, and perinatal factors that may be associated with failing the otoacoustic emissions (OAE) newborn hearing screen. Study Design A retrospective chart review was performed looking at hearing screens performed on 1272 newborn infants by OAE testing. Socioeconomic, demographic, neonatal, and perinatal factors were reviewed to determine association with failing the OAE newborn hearing screen. Results Our results demonstrate that Hispanic race was significantly associated with failing the newborn OAE hearing screen with an odds ratio of 2.54 (CI = 1.56-4.14, P = .0002). Family history of hearing loss was also significantly associated with failing the newborn hearing screen. Newborns with a family history of hearing loss were 13 times more likely to fail the newborn screen (odds ratio = 13.63, CI = 4.09-45.43, P < .0001). Conclusions Hispanic race and family history of hearing loss are statistically significant risk factors for failing the newborn OAE hearing screen.