Maintaining acceptably low referral rates in TEOAE-based newborn hearing screening programs

Modelling the cost-effectiveness of a newborn hearing screening programme; usability and pitfalls

OBJECTIVE

The EUSCREEN project concerns the study of European vision and hearing screening programmes. Part of the project was the development of a cost-effectiveness model to analyse such programmes. We describe the development and usability of an online tool to enable stakeholders to design, analyse or modify a newborn hearing screening (NHS) programme.

DESIGN

Data from literature, from existing NHS programmes, and observations by users were used to develop and refine the tool. Required inputs include prevalence of the hearing impairment, test sequence and its timing, attendance, sensitivity, and specificity of each screening step. Outputs include the number of cases detected and the costs of screening and diagnostics.

STUDY SAMPLE

Eleven NHS programmes with reliable data.

RESULTS

Three analyses are presented, exploring the effect of low attendance, number of screening steps, testing in the maternity ward, or screening at a later age, on the benefits and costs of the programme. Knowledge of the epidemiology of a staged screening programme is crucial when using the tool.

CONCLUSIONS

This study presents a tool intended to aid stakeholders to design a new or analyse an existing hearing screening programme in terms of benefits and costs.

Pilot implementation of newborn hearing screening programme at four hospitals in southern Thailand

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effectiveness and benefit of a universal newborn hearing screening programme at four different hospitals in southern Thailand, between January and July 2017.

METHODS

One screener per hospital recorded demographic data of all newborns and their exposure to risk of hearing loss, and evaluated their hearing by transient otoacoustic emission technology. Those who demonstrated bilateral moderate to profound hearing loss at both a first and second screening were referred for diagnostic assessment. Those with confirmed hearing loss received treatment and regular follow-up appointments, and their speech development was assessed at 1 year of age. We determined effectiveness by comparing our achieved coverage and proportion of follow-up and referrals with benchmarks set by the American Academy of Pediatrics (≥ 95%, ≥ 95% and ≤ 4%, respectively), and determined benefit by calculating the composite language scores of hearing-impaired infants who received early intervention.

FINDINGS

We screened 6140 eligible newborns, and achieved a screening coverage of 95.4% (5859/6140), lost 25.7% (63/245) and 22.0% (9/41) to follow-up at the second screening and diagnostic assessment stages, respectively, and obtained an overall proportion of referrals of 0.7% (41/6140). Twelve infants were confirmed as having hearing loss and received early intervention; nine (75%) demonstrated normal speech development by their first birthday. Our universal hearing screening yielded a prevalence of sensorineural hearing loss of less than 0.1% (3/6140).

CONCLUSION

Although ineffective by American Academy of Pediatrics standards, we demonstrated the benefit of early intervention in infants diagnosed with hearing loss.

Identifying the Optimal Age to Perform Newborn Screening for Hearing Loss in Uganda

Background:

Permanent congenital hearing loss affects up to 6/1000 births in developing countries. Currently, in Uganda there is no newborn screening for hearing loss (NSHL) program and no published work on this topic. Within the existing healthcare system there are two opportunities to deliver screening, at birth or 6 weeks of age when infants receive their immunizations.

Aim:

This study explored the outcomes of otoacoustic emission (OAE) testing in infants at birth and 6 weeks of age, to identify the optimal age for screening.

Subjects and Methods:

This cross-sectional pilot study recruited 60 consecutive infants from two health centres in Kampala, Uganda. Thirty infants were newborns recruited from the postnatal ward and 30 were aged 4–8 weeks from the immunization clinic, we performed OAE testing on all infants.

Results:

The results showed 56.7% (17/30) of newborn infants passed OAE testing compared with 90.0% (27/30) of the immunization infants, P < 0.01. Furthermore, of the 11 newborn infants aged ≥24 h of age 90.9% (10/11) passed, compared with the 19 infants <24 h of age where 37% (7/19) passed, P < 0.01.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrates a higher pass rate for OAE testing for infants ≥24 h of age compared to those <24 h of age. The overall lower pass rate of the newborn infants could be due to external ear debris and middle ear fluid compromising the OAE testing. These findings would support a NSHL programme in Uganda that offers screening to infants ≥24 h of age, to maximize the cost-effectiveness of the program.

Changes in transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions in the first month of life

OBJECTIVE

Current Joint Committee on Infant Hearing guidelines recommend the use of transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) as a screening tool to identify hearing loss for newborns cared for in the well-baby nursery. Newborns who do not pass the TEOAE screen before leaving the hospital are typically rescreened as outpatients by 1 mo of age, at which time, approximately 50 to 70% pass screening criteria. To better understand why many infants are referred at initial screening but pass at the rescreening, more complete knowledge of developmental differences in the TEOAE levels, noise floor, or a combination of both for infants who pass and fail birth screening is needed. In addition, it has been shown that infants with occluding ear-canal debris are more likely to not pass TEOAE screening at the hospital than those without occluding ear-canal debris. This study explores whether changes in TEOAE levels in half-octave frequency bands are related to changes in ear-canal debris over the first month of life.

DESIGN

Seventy-nine neonates from a well-baby nursery had their hearing screened before leaving the hospital and again at approximately 1 mo of age. All participants passed the follow-up screening. Overall TEOAE levels and levels in half-octave frequency bands centered at 1.5, 2, 3, and 4 kHz were measured. Judgments of ear-canal debris were made by otoscopy and were rated using one of three categories at both visits.

RESULTS

TEOAE levels in infants significantly increased from birth to 1 mo of age across all frequencies tested, regardless of whether they passed or failed the screening at birth. The increase in TEOAE level was frequency dependent, with the greatest increases occurring in the highest frequency bands. No significant correlation between debris change and frequency-specific changes was found for either ear. Infants who failed the screening at birth but who subsequently passed at 1 mo of age had significantly lower TEOAE levels at the rescreening than did infants with passing TEOAE levels at birth. However, pass/fail status at birth was only a weak predictor of TEOAE levels at 1 mo of age.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in TEOAE levels during the first month of life is frequency dependent, with greater increases occurring at higher frequencies. Increased TEOAE levels were not associated with changes in ear-canal debris.

Hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening for early detection of permanent congenital hearing loss in Lagos, Nigeria

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility and effectiveness of hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening programme for the early detection of permanent congenital or early-onset hearing loss (PCEHL) in Lagos, Nigeria.

METHODS

A cross-sectional pilot study based on a two-stage universal newborn hearing screening by non-specialist health workers using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem-response (AABR) in an inner-city maternity hospital over a consecutive period of 40 weeks. The main outcome measures were the practicality of screening by non-specialist staff with minimal training, functionality of screening instruments in an inner-city environment, screening coverage, referral rate, return rate for diagnosis, yield of PCEHL and average age of PCEHL confirmation.

RESULTS

Universal hearing screening of newborns by non-specialist staff without prior audiological experience is feasible in an inner-city environment in Lagos after a training period of two-weeks. Notwithstanding excessive ambient noise within and outside the wards, it was possible to identify a test site for TEOAE screening within the hospital. The screening coverage was 98.7% (1330/1347) of all eligible newborns and the mean age of screening was 2.6 days. Forty-four babies out of the 1274 who completed the two-stage screening were referred yielding a referral rate of 3.5%. Only 16% (7/44) of babies scheduled for diagnostic evaluation returned and all were confirmed with hearing loss resulting in an incidence of 5.5 (7/1274) per 1000 live births or a programme yield of 5.3 (7/1330) per 1000. Six infants had bilateral hearing loss and the degree was severe (> or =70 dB nHL) in three infants, moderate (40 dB nHL) in one infant and mild (<40 dB nHL) in two infants. The age at diagnosis ranged from 46 days to 360 days and only two infants were diagnosed within 90 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospital-based universal hearing screening of newborns before discharge is feasible in Nigeria. Non-specialist staff are valuable in achieving a satisfactory referral rate with a two-stage screening protocol. However, a more efficient tracking and follow-up system is needed to improve the return rate for diagnosis and age of confirmation of hearing loss.

Newborn Hearing Screening: the relation between bathing and the retesting rate

One of the goals of a Newborn Hearing Screening Program (NHSP) is to have a low retesting rate.

Aim

To investigate the association between the retesting rate and the bath of newborn babies. Study design: cross-sectional contemporary cohort.

Materials and Methods

Transient otoacoustic emissions (TOE) results have been compared to the information received from the nurse's aide who bathed the babies on the day of the test (373 newborns), and the time interval between the TOE study and the last bath (350 newborns).

Results

Significant statistical differences were found in relation to the percentage of retesting when babies were bathed by certain nurse's aides. On the other hand, the percentage of retesting decreased significantly when the time interval between the last bath and the TOE study was longer than 7 hours and 50 minutes.

Conclusion

Moisture of the external acoustic meatus, caused by inappropriate protection against water during bath, and the short interval between the bath and the ETOE study, could be considered as possible factors causing retesting in NHSP programs.

Neonatal hearing screening: evaluation of tone-burst and click-evoked otoacoustic emission test criteria

OBJECTIVE

Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) are widely used in universal neonatal hearing screening programs. A common finding in many such programs is a relatively high false-positive rate. This is often due to infant physiological noise adversely affecting the emission recording, leading to a "refer" screening outcome. In an attempt to reduce false-positive screening outcomes related to the effects of noise on otoacoustic emission response detection, tone-burst-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TBOAEs) were included in a neonatal hearing screening program because TBOAEs may elicit a greater signal-to-noise ratio than CEOAEs. The research project compared the pass/refer rate for a CEOAE-based test using established pass/refer criteria with the pass/refer rate for screening criteria that were based on TBOAE results alone or on combined CEOAE and TEOAE results.

DESIGN

Neonates were recruited at the Hong Kong Adventist Hospital, and both CEOAEs and TBOAEs were performed. Six passing criteria were used in this study, based on CEOAEs only; CEOAEs plus 1 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 2 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 3 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 1, 2, and 3 kHz TBOAEs; and TBOAEs only.

RESULTS

Data from 298 neonates (546 ears) were obtained. Criteria set 1, using CEOAEs only, demonstrated a pass rate of 79.1%, and 114 ears were referred. Criteria set 2, using CEOAEs together with TBOAEs recorded at 1 kHz, passed 39 more ears than Protocol 1, and the pass rate was 86.3%. Hence, the overall referral rate for total number of screened ears decreased by 7.2 percentage points. Criteria set 3, using CEOAEs together with TBOAEs recorded at 2 kHz, and Criteria set 4, using CEOAEs in conjunction with TBOAEs recorded at 3 kHz, gave pass rates similar to Criteria set 1. Criteria set 5, using TBOAE information at frequencies where CEOAEs were not rated as "pass," raised the pass rate from 79.1 to 87.6%, reducing the overall referral rate by 8.5 percentage points. Criteria set 6, in which neonates were screened with TBOAEs recorded at 1, 2, and 3 kHz, gave a pass rate of 78.4%, similar to results for the CEOAE-only procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Both Criteria sets 2 and 5, which combined CEOAE and TBOAE recordings, gave significantly higher pass rates than Criteria sets 1, 3, 4, and 6. The results suggest that the introduction of combined CEOAE and TBOAE protocols may assist in the reduction of refer outcomes, and hence the false-positive rates, of neonatal hearing screening programs.

Success rate of newborn and follow-up screening of hearing using otoacoustic emissions

OBJECTIVE

During the last 6 years, and after a long period of pilot study, a universal newborn hearing screening program based on otoacoustic emissions is implemented in Iaso Maternity Hospital. Our purpose is to present the success rate of otoacoustic emission testing on discharge from the hospital and 1 month later.

METHODS

All full-term newborns who were screened during a period of 2 years and failed testing after one or more sessions of transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions, on discharge from the hospital, were included in the study. These newborns were retested approximately 1 month after discharge.

RESULTS

Twenty-five thousand and thirty-two newborns were examined in total. We found 534 (2.1%) 'refer' cases. Only 223 of them (41.8%) returned to retest in follow-up after 1 month. From the rescreening, 59 (2.3 per thousand) newborns failed in the test again and were referred for diagnostic audiological evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of referrals was small, but efforts should be made to decrease it further. The final number of 'failures' found, approaches the expected rate of definitely diagnosed deafness reported from other settings. The main problem we have still to confront is the high missed to-follow-up rate.

Making universal newborn hearing screening a success

OBJECTIVE

Following a long period of pilot study, Iaso maternity hospital established a universal newborn hearing screening program based on transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs). The aim of this study is to present the improvement of outcome measures of this program, comparing the results of two groups of newborns screened successively.

METHODS

We analyzed data from two groups of full-term newborns screened at our setting. The first group included all newborns born and screened during the initial 3 years of application of the program and the second group included all newborns born and screened during the next 2 years. TEOAEs were performed during the first days after birth. All newborns who failed the initial test underwent repeat testing with TEOAEs before hospital discharge. Newborns with absence of otoacoustic emissions were referred to follow-up test after 1 month. Results were compared between the two groups.

RESULTS

The first group included 22,195 newborns-examined during 3 years and the second group included 25,032 newborns-examined during 2 years, due to reduction of the rate of newborns who missed screening. Refer rate was 3.1% for the first group and 2.1% for the second group. "Missed to follow-up" rate was reduced from 72.2% in the first group to 58.2% in the second group.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of newborns who did not undergo screening and the rate of "missed to follow-up" newborns were reduced in time, due to various modifications of the protocol. Universal newborn hearing screening may be, thus, a feasible and cost effective method of identifying congenital hearing loss.

Comparison of currently available devices designed for newborn hearing screening using automated auditory brainstem and/or otoacoustic emission measurements

OBJECTIVE

Suitability in clinical practise of three currently available devices designed for automated newborn hearing screening, one combining evoked otoacoustic emissions (EOAE) and automated auditory brain stem response (AABR), the Echoscreen-TDA from Fischer-Zoth, and two AABR screeners, the Algo 3 from Natus and the Beraphone MB11 from Maico, were tested prospectively.

METHODS

Transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) were measured in one ear of 150 healthy newborns using the Echoscreen-TDA. Three groups of 50 subjects each were tested additionally for AABR recordings either with Echoscreen-TDA, Algo 3 or Beraphone MB11. Measurements were performed after the second day of life. The following aspects were evaluated: (a) subject-instrumentation interface (b) test time (c) costs (unit price and costs for disposable material) and (d) pass rates.

RESULTS

Connecting the subjects to the device was the easiest for EOAE measurements with the Echoscreen-TDA, followed by AABR recordings with the Algo 3 and Echoscreen-TDA and were most difficult with the Beraphone MB11. The median test time on one ear was less than 30 s for EOAE measurements and 4-5 min for AABR recordings. Costs for the equipment and for disposable material were lowest for the Echoscreen-TDA and Beraphone MB11, respectively and highest for the Algo 3. Pass rates were highest with 98% for AABR recordings using the Algo 3 and lowest with 92% for AABR recordings using the Beraphone MB11, but differences were not statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS

All tested devices can be used for universal neonatal hearing screening. It was easier to connect the subject to the device and measurements were quicker for OAE than for AABR measurements. Echoscreen-TDA combines the two techniques and had the lowest costs for the AABR equipment. Algo 3 had the highest costs for the equipment and for disposable material, but it was highly reliable, and both ears can be tested simultaneously. Connecting the subject was the most difficult with the Beraphone MB11, but there were no disposable supply costs.

Decreasing test time in newborn hearing screening

This study examined the effect of reducing the number of accepted responses in transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions based on the results of a universal neonatal hearing screening program. Our intention was to decrease the test time of newborns. A total of 464 ears were examined by using a universal newborn hearing-screening program implemented in a private maternity hospital. ILO88 Otodynamics Analyzer Quickscreen program was used for all testing and a two-stage procedure was adopted. In the first stage, the results were continuously evaluated for the 'pass' criteria, during the test, after at least 20 low-noise sweeps had been presented. As soon as the criteria were met, the test was interrupted and the results were recorded. In the second stage of the procedure, the test was continued and finally terminated after 260 quiet samples had been recorded. The results of each stage of this procedure were compared and evaluated. A total of 402 ears had normal otoacoustic emissions and only 62 ears had absent emissions. It was concluded that after a minimum of 20 averaged quiet responses, which we consider necessary in order to record reliable emissions and as soon as the 'pass' criteria were fulfilled the test could be terminated without affecting the 'pass-fail' rates which were similar in both stages. However, we believe that for diagnostic and clinical purposes, all 260 quiet samples must be used, because the results after the second stage indicated statistically better scores in response and reproducibility measures.

Assessment of medial olivocochlear system function in pre-term and full-term newborns using a rapid test of transient otoacoustic emissions

This study was conducted to investigate maturation of the medial olivocochlear efferent system (MOCS) in pre- and full-term neonates using Quickscreen (Otodynamics Ltd) and to confirm previous findings on transient otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) suppression in neonates. MOCS maturation was investigated in 46 neonates born at the Chaim Sheba Medical Center, Tel Hashomer, Israel, using Quickscreen. All neonates were normal with no family history of general or auditory disease and no risk factors for hearing impairment. MOCS function appears gradually in human pre-term neonates and is considered to reach maturity shortly after term birth. The clinical value of MOCS testing in specific populations of newborns at risk for hearing and/or brainstem function can be legitimately raised as activation of the MOCS clearly alters cochlear output. The present results can be interpreted to support the testing of infants at risk of developing abnormal MOCS function using a commercially available rapid TEOAE measurement system.

[Systematic screening of deafness at a maternity ward using evoked otoacoustic emissions: practical aspects and parental attitudes]

OBJECTIVE

Evaluation of the feasibility and parental attitudes towards a hearing screening programme using evoked otoacoustic emissions, implemented in a maternity ward in France.

METHODS

A hearing screening test using transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) was proposed to each baby, and an anonymous questionnaire was given to parents to assess their attitudes towards the screening procedure.

RESULTS

Although the refusal of the test reached 16% (mainly during the first two weeks of the program), more than 92% of parents judged the test as being useful, and 65% wished it to be systematically done. However, nearly 35% of parents admitted to have a low level anxiety about being unnecessarily worried by the test results. One hundred and twenty-four babies were screened. Fifty three per cent of the tests have been performed in less than ten minutes, with an average of 12.2 minutes. This duration does not include delays due to programme and babies management. False positive rate (uni or bilateral fail) was 10.5% at the first stage. Repeating the test before discharge decreased the false positive rate to 6.5%.

CONCLUSION

Although limited in time, this study shows that a systematic hearing screening programme using TEOAE is possible and should be done in France. False positive rate was below 7%, and the test was considered as useful by more than 90% of parents, although knowledge about deafness in childhood and its consequences were clearly insufficient.

Cost and cost-effectiveness of universal screening for hearing loss in newborns

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the cost and cost-effectiveness of universal newborn hearing screening.

STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING

Decision analysis model utilizing the hospital perspective. This model evaluated 4 distinct protocols for screening a fixed and defined hypothetical cohort of newborn infants.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Cost of screening and the number of infants with hearing loss identified through universal screening.

RESULTS

Otoacoustic emissions testing at birth followed by repeat testing at follow up demonstrated the lowest cost ($13 per infant) and had the lowest cost-effectiveness ratio ($5100 per infant with hearing loss identified). Screening auditory brainstem evoked response testing at birth with no screening test at follow-up was the only protocol with greater effectiveness, but it also demonstrated the highest cost ($25 per infant) and highest cost-effectiveness ratio ($9500 per infant with hearing loss identified). These findings were robust to sensitivity analysis, including best-case and worst-case estimation. The prevalence of hearing loss and the fraction of infants returned for follow-up testing had a large impact on the absolute level, but not relative level of protocol cost and cost-effectiveness.

CONCLUSION

The otoacoustic emissions testing protocol should be selected by screening programs concerned with cost and cost-effectiveness, although there are certain caveats to consider.

SIGNIFICANCE

The most significant barriers to implementation of universal newborn hearing screening programs have been financial, and this study compares the most common protocols currently in use. This study can assist program directors not only in the decision to initiate universal screening but also in their choice of screening protocol.

Universal newborn hearing screening in an inner-city, managed care environment

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

Universal neonatal hearing screening (UNHS) programs aim to identify and treat educationally significant hearing loss in the first months of life. Several states have mandated UNHS for all newborns. Such programs have been successful in small, homogeneous populations. As larger states attempt to implement such programs, important obstacles have arisen, particularly in sparsely populated rural environments and in the inner city, where poverty, unstable living situations, and inadequate access to health care make follow-up of infants failing initial testing difficult.

STUDY DESIGN

We performed a prospective longitudinal study examining the effects of increasingly complex and expensive interventions designed to ensure that children failing initial hearing screening returned for complete evaluation and habilitation.

METHODS

A UNHS program based on transient evoked otoacoustic emissions testing was implemented at Temple University Hospital, with 2,000 births per year. At 6 months into the program, efficacy was assessed and modifications in follow-up methodology were made in an attempt to improved rate of return of infants failing newborn screening. The effect of these interventions was reassessed 6 months later.

RESULTS

In its first 12 months, the Temple University Infant and Young Child Hearing Intervention Initiative successfully screened 95% (2,031) of all newborns using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. Collecting a complete database profile for each newborn, establishing rapport with the family, and offering immediate follow-up appointments yielded a 61% return rate after discharge. The addition of a dedicated project secretary, free day-care for siblings, and cab vouchers for transportation and the elimination of a requirement for health maintenance organization referrals increased follow-up yield to 75%.

CONCLUSION

Given adequate resources and planning, UNHS can be successful, even in economically depressed environments.

The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: introduction and overview

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility of universal newborn hearing screening, including intervention of identified infants, in the state of New York.

DESIGN

The New York State Department of Health issued a request for proposals that invited regional perinatal centers to apply for funding to implement universal newborn hearing screening. Hospitals were free to choose their own protocols but were to use physiologically based measures to screen infants for possible hearing loss. Criteria for passing the screening measures were common across sites. Infants failing the screening were to have diagnostic testing. Identified infants were to be followed by the state's Early Intervention Program and its associated Infant-Child Health Assessment Program.

RESULTS

Seven regional perinatal centers (eight hospitals) representing the various regions of the state were funded for 3 yr to implement universal newborn hearing screening and follow-up of identified infants. Detailed data analysis was performed for inpatient, outpatient, and intervention outcome measures and for the various protocols. Most of the outcome measures were analyzed in terms of year of program operation, nursery type, and geographic region of the state.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal newborn hearing screening was feasible in regional perinatal centers across the state of New York. The average ages of identification of hearing loss, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention were less than those reported in published studies where universal newborn hearing screening was not in place.

A TEOAE screening protocol based on linear click stimuli: performance and scoring criteria

In order to improve the quality of current TEOAE recording methodologies, we have conducted a comparison of TEOAE neonatal recordings acquired with linear protocols using click stimuli of 68 dB SPL and non-linear protocols using the ILO default stimulus values. From a theoretical standpoint it was expected that the linear recordings would generate responses characterized by higher S/N ratios due to the fact that the stimulus sequence contains four clicks of the same intensity and polarity. The project included recordings from 1,416 neonatal ears (age 48 h). The TEOAE data were compared in terms of correlation, response amplitude, noise, corrected response and S/N ratio in the 1.0-, 2.0-, 3.0-, 4.0- and 5.0-kHz bands, using a paired t-test criterion. We found that windowed (4-14 ms) responses evoked by a linear TEOAE protocol generated superior S/N estimates in the 2.0-, 3.0-, 4.0- and 5.0-kHz TEOAE bands, in addition to superior correlation estimates, and demonstrated lower levels of noise. Clear-cut scoring criteria were established for the S/N ratios at 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 kHz, by constructing one-sided distribution-free tolerance boundaries.

Cost analysis of TEOAE-based universal newborn hearing screening

Although more and more hospitals are implementing universal newborn hearing screening programs, there is still very little information available about the costs of newborn hearing screening programs. The few articles which have been published evaluate technologies or protocols which are no longer used, are incomplete, or are based on hypothetical estimates of the costs and time necessary to do screening. After briefly reviewing the extant literature, this article describes a cost analysis of a TEOAE-based universal newborn hearing screening program. Reasons why the cost per baby ($7.42) is lower than in previous reports are explained, and the benefits of having accurate cost analysis data are summarized.