Newborn hearing screening failure and maternal factors during pregnancy

Prevalence of Hearing Impairment in High-Risk Neonates at Kalaburagi Region of Northern Karnataka: A Hospital-Based Cross-Sectional Study

The study estimated the prevalence of hearing impairment in high-risk neonates and effect of high-risk factors on the hearing. A hospital-based cross sectional study was conducted on 327 neonates with high-risk factors. All the high-risk babies were screened using TEOAE and AABR followed by diagnostic ABR testing. Six (2%) of high-risk neonates were found to have bilateral severe sensorineural hearing loss. Risk factors associated with hearing impairment include multiple risk factors of Preterm delivery, hyperbilirubinemia, congenital anomalies, neonatal sepsis, viral or bacterial infection, positive family history of hearing loss and prolonged NICU stay. Further, the inclusion of AABR along with TEOAE has been shown to be a useful tool in reducing false-positive rates and identifying hearing loss.

Change to Hearing Loss-Related Risks and Screening in Preterm Infants

Hearing loss is one of the most common congenital defects in infancy; it increases speech and language delays and adversely affects academic achievement and socialemotional development. The risk of hearing loss in premature infants is higher than that in normal newborns, and because of the fragility of the auditory nervous system, it is more vulnerable to different risk factors. The hearing screening guidelines in current use were proposed by the American Academy of Pediatrics and updated in 2007, but there are no uniform guidelines for hearing screening in preterm infants. This review focuses on the risk factors related to hearing loss in premature infants, hearing screening strategies, and reasons for failure. The aim is to provide a more comprehensive understanding of hearing development in preterm infants to achieve early detection and early intervention. At the same time, attention should be paid to delayed auditory maturation in preterm infants to avoid excessive intervention. KEY POINTS: · Hearing loss is very common in infancy, especially in premature infants.. · Genetic factors, infection, hyperbilirubinemia, drugs, and noise are the main causes.. · We should pay attention to the delayed hearing maturity of premature infants and avoid excessive intervention..

Cry features of healthy neonates who passed their newborn hearing screening vs. those who did not

OBJECTIVES

Temporal and fundamental frequency (fo) variations in infant cries provide critical insights into the maturity of vocal control and hearing performances. Earlier research has examined the use of vocalisation properties (in addition to hearing tests) to identify infants at risk of hearing impairment. The aim of this study was to determine whether such an approach could be suitable for neonates.

METHODS

To investigate this, we recruited 74 healthy neonates within their first week of life as our participants, assigning them to either a group that passed the ABR-based NHS (PG, N = 36) or a group that did not, but were diagnosed as normally hearing in follow-up check at 3 months of life, a so-called false-positive group (NPG, N = 36). Spontaneously uttered cries (N = 2330) were recorded and analysed quantitatively. The duration, minimum, maximum and mean fo, as well as two variability measures (fo range, fo sigma), were calculated for each cry utterance, averaged for individual neonates, and compared between the groups.

RESULTS

A multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) revealed no significant effects. This confirms that cry features reflecting vocal control do not differ between healthy neonates with normal hearing, irrespective of the outcome of their initial NHS.

CONCLUSIONS

Healthy neonates who do not pass the NHS but are normal hearing in the follow-up (false positive cases) have the same cry properties as those with normal hearing who do. This is an essential prerequisite to justify the research strategy of incorporating vocal analysis into NHS to complement ABR measures in identifying hearing-impaired newborns.

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.

The Effect of Anesthesia Type During Delivery on Neonatal Otoacoustic Emission Hearing Test Results: A Tertiary Center Experience

BACKGROUND

Hearing is essential for the healthy development of an infant as language is one of the main stimulants of intellectual capacity. We investigate the effect of anesthesia type during delivery on neonatal otoacoustic emission (OAE) hearing test results.

METHODS

This retrospective cross-sectional study includes 1,493 healthy, full-term (39/0-40/6 gestational weeks) newborns of healthy women and who were delivered by cesarean section. Newborns were divided into 2 groups based on their anesthesia type during delivery: 1) general anesthesia group (n=160), and 2) spinal anesthesia group (n=1333). Maternal age, anesthesia type, birth weight, gestational age at birth, neonatal gender, 1^st-5^th minute APGAR scores, and OAE results were compared between the groups.

RESULTS

1287 (86.2%) newborns were reported to have passed the first step of OAE; 206 (13.8%) newborns were reported to have failed the first step and passed the second test. In the general anesthesia group, 133 (83.1%) of the newborns passed the first OAE test and 27 (16.9%) newborns had false-positive results. In the spinal anesthesia group, 1,154 (86.6%) of the newborns passed the first OAE test and 179 (13.4%) newborns had false-positive results. The difference between the 2 groups by false-positive values was found to be statistically significant (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Type of delivery anesthesia may have an effect on the false-positive rates of OAE test results.

Etiology of newborn hearing impairment in Guangdong province: 10-year experience with screening, diagnosis, and follow-up

BACKGROUND

Hearing impairment is one of the most common birth defects in children. Universal newborn hearing screenings have been performed for 19 years in Guangdong province, China. A screening/diagnosis/intervention system has gradually been put in place. Over the past 10 years, a relatively complete data management system had been established. In the present study, an etiological analysis of newborn cases that failed the initial and follow-up screenings was performed.

METHODS

The nature and degree of hearing impairment in newborns were confirmed by a set of procedures performed at the time of initial hearing screening, rescreening and final hearing diagnosis. Then, multiple examinations were performed to explore the associated etiology.

RESULTS

Over a period of 10 years, 720 children were diagnosed with newborn hearing loss. Among these children, 445 (61.81%) children had a clearly identified cause, which included genetic factor(s) (30.56%), secretory otitis media (13.30%), maternal rubella virus infection during pregnancy (5.83%), inner ear malformations (4.86%), maternal human cytomegalovirus infection during pregnancy (2.92%), malformation of the middle ear ossicular chain (2.50%) and auditory neuropathy (1.81%). In addition, 275 cases of sensorineural hearing loss of unknown etiology accounted for 38.19% of the children surveyed.

CONCLUSIONS

Long-term follow-up is needed to detect delayed hearing impairment and auditory development in children. The need for long-term follow-up should be taken into account when designing an intervention strategy. Furthermore, the use of the deafness gene chip should further elucidate the etiology of neonatal hearing impairment.