Improving newborn hearing screening: Are automated auditory brainstem response ear inserts an effective option?

Protocol and programme factors associated with referral and loss to follow-up from newborn hearing screening: a systematic review

Background

An effective newborn hearing screening programme has low referral rate and low loss to follow-up (LTFU) rate after referral from initial screening. This systematic review identified studies evaluating the effect of protocol and programme factors on these two outcomes, including the screening method used and the infant group.

Methods

Five databases were searched (latest: April 2021). Included studies reported original data from newborn hearing screening and described the target outcomes against a protocol or programme level factor. Studies were excluded if results were only available for one risk condition, for each ear, or for < 100 infants, or if methodological bias was observed. Included studies were evaluated for quality across three domains: sample, screening and outcome, using modified criteria from the Ottawa-Newcastle and QUADAS-2 scales. Findings from the included studies were synthesised in tables, figures and text.

Results

Fifty-eight studies reported on referral rate, 8 on LTFU rate, and 35 on both. Only 15 studies defined LTFU. Substantial diversity in referral and LTFU rate was observed across studies. Twelve of fourteen studies that evaluated screening method showed lower referral rates with aABR compared to TEOAE for well babies (WB). Rescreening before hospital discharge and screening after 3 days of age reduced referral rates. Studies investigating LTFU reported lower rates for programmes that had audiologist involvement, did not require fees for step 2, were embedded in a larger regional or national programme, and scheduled follow-up in a location accessible to the families. In programmes with low overall LTFU, higher LTFU was observed for infants from the NICU compared to WB.

Conclusion

Although poor reporting and exclusion of non-English articles may limit the generalisability from this review, key influential factors for referral and LTFU rates were identified. Including aABR in WB screening can effectively reduce referral rates, but it is not the only solution. The reported referral and LTFU rates vary largely across studies, implying the contribution of several parameters identified in this review and the context in which the programme is performed. Extra attention should be paid to infants with higher risk for hearing impairment to ensure their return to follow-up.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12887-022-03218-0.

Quality measures of a multicentre universal newborn hearing screening program in Malaysia

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate and discuss the outcomes of the universal newborn hearing screening program conducted at four public hospitals in Malaysia.

METHOD

A retrospective analysis of the universal newborn hearing screening database from each hospital was performed. The database consisted of 28,432 and 30,340 screening results of babies born in 2015 and 2016, respectively. Quality indicators (coverage rate, referral rate, return for follow-up rate, and ages at screening and diagnosis) were calculated.

RESULTS

Overall coverage rate across the four hospitals was 75% in 2015 and 87.4% in 2016. Over the two years, the referral rates for the first screening ranged from 2.7% to 33.93% with only one hospital achieving the recommended benchmark of <4% in both years. The return for follow-up rates for each participating hospital was generally below the recommended benchmark of ≥95%. The mean age at screening was 3.9 ± 1.2 days and 3.3 ± 0.4 days, respectively. The mean age at diagnosis for 70 infants diagnosed with permanent hearing loss was 4.7 ± 0.7 months in 2015 and 3.6 ± 0.9 months in 2016.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality measures for the universal newborn hearing screening program in four public hospitals in Malaysia were lower than the required standards. Nevertheless, some quality indicators showed statistically significant improvements over the two years. Next steps involve identifying and implementing the best practice strategies to improve the outcome measures and thus the quality of the program.

Comparing Auditory Brainstem Responses evoked by Click and Sweep-Tone in Normal-Hearing Adults

Auditory brainstem response (ABR) is an objective method via which hearing loss could be detected. ABR induced by click, a broadband signal, is generally considered as the gold standard. However, due to the inherent delay of the cochlear traveling wave, click cannot excite the entire cochlear basement membrane at the same time, leading to the attenuation of the induced ABR waveform. In order to resolve this limitation, a sweep-tone-based stimulus that reconstructs the arrival time of different frequency components with respect to the delay characteristics of cochlear basement membrane was designed and used to induce ABR in this study. Subsequently, we compared the performance of the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR method and the commonly adopted click induced ABR at different test levels and different stimulus rates. And the obtained results showed that the waveform morphology of sweep-tone-induced ABR was significantly better than that of click induced ABR across different test levels and stimulus rates. Moreover, compared to the click induced ABR at different sweeps, we found that the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR effectively induced the ABR waveform at a relatively faster rate. Hence, the proposed sweep-tone-induced ABR approach provides a new method to improve the sensitivity of ABR detection in hearing loss.

Universal newborn hearing screening using A-TEOAE and A-ABR: The experience of a large public hospital

BACKGROUND

Universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) aims to identify hearing loss in the early postnatal period; prompt detection of bilateral or unilateral hearing loss is mandatory for timely intervention.

METHODS

This retrospective study reports the results of the first two years of a UNHS program on 4,719 newborns in a large public Italian hospital. Screening was divided into two levels: automated transient otoacoustic emissions were used for first level; automated auditory brainstem response for second level. Second level included children with a "refer" response at first level and babies with a family history for hearing loss or other risk factors. Hearing loss diagnosis was made using clinical auditory brainstem response.

RESULTS

During first level, 254 (5.4% ) newborns were "refer". At retest, 130 (51.1% ) babies were PASS and 48 (18.8% ) were "refer". 76 babies dropped out (29.9% ). 146 babies (3.1% ) were referred to the second level: 48 for a "refer" response at first level and 98 for a PASS response but potential hearing loss due to risk factors. 24 babies dropped out (16.4% ). Out of 122 newborns tested in the second level, 105 (86.1% ) had a PASS response and 17 (13.9% ) were "refer". Our screening protocol identified 7 (0.14% ) babies with profound hearing loss; 5 had unilateral and 2 had bilateral hearing loss. 2 babies dropped out at diagnostic level (11.8% ).

CONCLUSIONS

A correct and early diagnosis of hearing loss is mandatory to prevent permanent consequences; the spread of hearing screening programs is the optimal solution to reach this goal.