[Results of one year's application of a universal protocol for the early detection of hearing loss in neonates]

Prevalence of permanent childhood hearing loss detected at the universal newborn hearing screen: Systematic review and meta-analysis

CONTEXT

Permanent childhood hearing loss (PCHL) can affect speech, language, and wider outcomes. Adverse effects are mitigated through universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) and early intervention.

OBJECTIVE

We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate prevalence of UNHS-detected PCHL (bilateral loss ≥26 dB HL) and its variation by admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). A secondary objective was to report UNHS programme performance (PROSPERO: CRD42016051267).

DATA SOURCES

Multiple electronic databases were interrogated in January 2017, with further reports identified from article citations and unpublished literature (November 2017).

STUDY SELECTION

UNHS reports from very highly-developed (VHD) countries with relevant prevalence and performance data; no language or date restrictions.

DATA EXTRACTION

Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality.

RESULTS

We identified 41 eligible reports from 32 study populations (1799863 screened infants) in 6195 non-duplicate references. Pooled UNHS-detected PCHL prevalence was 1.1 per 1000 screened children (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9, 1.3; I2 = 89.2%). This was 6.9 times (95% CI: 3.8, 12.5) higher among those admitted to NICU. Smaller studies were significantly associated with higher prevalences (Egger's test: p = 0.02). Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 89-100% and 92-100% respectively, positive predictive values from 2-84%, with all negative predictive values 100%.

LIMITATIONS

Results are generalisable to VHD countries only. Estimates and inferences were limited by available data.

CONCLUSIONS

In VHD countries, 1 per 1000 screened newborns require referral to clinical services for PCHL. Prevalence is higher in those admitted to NICU. Improved reporting would support further examination of screen performance and child demographics.

Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs

OBJECTIVE

Both transitory auditory otoemissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem responses (AABR) are considered adequate methods for universal hearing screening. The goal of this study was to compare the results obtained with each device, applying the same screening procedure.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

From 2001 to 2003, all the newborns in our health area (2454 infants) were evaluated with TEOAE (ILO92, otodynamics) and all those born from 2004 to 2006 (3117) were evaluated with AABR (AccuScreen, Fischer-Zoth). The population studied included all well newborns and those admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICU). The first screening was normally undertaken with well babies during the first 48h of life, before hospital discharge. Infants referred from this first step underwent a second screening after hospital discharge, before they were a month old.

RESULTS

The results from each study group were compared and analyzed for significant differences. TEOAE screening yielded 10.2% fail results from the first screening step; AABR gave 2.6%. In the second screening step, 2% of the newborns screened with TEOAE were referred, whereas 0.32% of those screened with AABR were referred. These differences are statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

Although AABR screening tests involve a slightly higher cost in time and money than TEOAE, the results obtained compensate this difference. AABR gives fewer false positives and a lower referral rate; the percent of infants lost during follow-up is consequently smaller. Therefore, in our environment, universal newborn auditory screening with AABR is more effective than that with TEOAE.