Universal neonatal hearing screening: past, present, and future

Universal Newborn Hearing Screening in Midwifery Education: A Survey

INTRODUCTION

Universal newborn hearing screening has been adopted by all 50 states in the United States. However, there is currently a lack of knowledge about how health care providers learn about universal newborn hearing screening during their education programs. The purpose of this study was to identify whether midwifery education programs in the United States currently include information regarding universal newborn hearing screening in the standard curricula and, if so, what specific information is covered.

METHODS

A survey that assessed whether specific topics related to universal newborn hearing screening are presented during midwifery education was sent to directors of midwifery education programs.

RESULTS

Seventy-one midwifery education program directors were contacted, and the response rate was 38% (27 surveys). Most respondents reported that universal newborn hearing screening is discussed in the program, with the amount of time spent covering these topics varying considerably. Programs provide information about the midwife's role in universal newborn hearing screening, legal obligation to provide hearing screening information, and tests used to complete universal newborn hearing screening. How to complete the hearing screening, counseling for parents about results, and follow-up after a newborn does not pass the screening are topics that were not often discussed. There was no influence of program type or program length on the universal newborn hearing screening content discussed.

DISCUSSION

The majority of midwifery education program directors that responded indicated that their programs include information about universal newborn hearing screening to midwifery students. There is a need for further information and resources specific to universal newborn hearing screening. Providing additional information to midwifery students about newborn hearing screening may result in increased awareness and education for families.

Zekai Tahir Burak Women's Health Education and Research Hospital newborn hearing screening results and assessment of the patients

AIM

Social, emotional, cognitive and language development of infants is provided with early diagnosis of hearing deficit. Hearing deficit is reported with a rate of 1-6 in 1000 live births in healthy newborns, while it reaches up to 10-30 in 1000 live births in newborns with risk factors. We aimed to compile the results of the hearing screening program applied in our hospital.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The records of the hearing screening program were examined and the results were compiled by reaching the records of the patients who were found to have hearing deficit.

RESULTS

Hearing test was applied in a total of 142 128 patients between 2005 and 2011. Hearing test was performed by evoked autoaucistic emission for two times in 26 690 of these patients and for three times in 2 412. A diagnosis of hearing deficit was made in 385 patients (0.27%) after application of ARB (Auditory Brainstem Response). The medical records of 171 of the patients who were referred for advanced investigations and treatment were obtained. 116 of these patients had a history of hospitalization in neonatal intensive care unit, while 55 patients had no history of hospitalization in neonatal intensive care unit. 49 of the patients had a gestational age below the 32(th) week and 122 had a gestational age above the 32(th) week. The median gestational age and birth weight values and ranges were found to be 35 (22-43) and 2 140 g (580-4 590 g), respectively. The risk factors included intrauterine growth retardation (n=24), multiple pregnancy (n=22), hyperbilirubinemia (n=74), blood exchange because of hyperbilirubinemia (n=7), sepsis (n=52), hypoglycemia (n=2), use of aminoglycoside and glycopeptide (n=99), use of furosemide (n=27), mechanical ventilation therapy (n=37), polycythemia (n=12), prenatal asphyxia (n=2), respiratory distress syndrome (n=45), chronic lung disease (n=11), surgery for retinopathy of prematurity (n=8) and hearing deficit in the mother or father (n=7).

CONCLUSIONS

In addition to the necessity of performing hearing screening in all newborns, infants with risk factors should be determined, hearing deficit should be screened with repeated hearing tests and social, emotional, cognitive and language development of the infant should be assured.

Moderate acoustic changes can disrupt the sleep of very preterm infants in their incubators

AIM

To evaluate the impact of moderate noise on the sleep of very early preterm infants (VPI).

METHODS

Observational study of 26 VPI of 26-31 weeks' gestation, with prospective measurements of sound pressure level and concomitant video records. Sound peaks were identified and classified according to their signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) above background noise. Prechtl's arousal states during sound peaks were assessed by two observers blinded to the purpose of the study. Changes in sleep/arousal states following sound peaks were compared with spontaneous changes during randomly selected periods without sound peaks.

RESULTS

We identified 598 isolated sound peaks (5 ≤ SNR < 10 decibel slow response A (dBA), n = 518; 10 ≤ SNR < 15 dBA, n = 80) during sleep. Awakenings were observed during 33.8% (95% CI, 24-43.7%) of exposures to sound peaks of 5-10 dBA SNR and 39.7% (95% CI, 26-53.3%) of exposures to sound peaks of SNR 10-15 dBA, but only 11.7% (95% CI, 6.2-17.1%) of control periods. The proportions of awakenings following sound peaks were higher than the proportions of arousals during control periods (p < 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS

Moderate acoustic changes can disrupt the sleep of VPI, and efficient sound abatement measures are needed.

[Newborn hearing screening test with multiple auditory steady-state responses]

INTRODUCTION

The techniques most frequently used within a screening context (otoacoustic emissions and click auditory brainstem response) have well-known limitations in hearing loss detection.

OBJECTIVE

This study examines the feasibility of a semi-automated multiple auditory steady-state responses (MSSR) system designed for neonatal hearing screening.

METHODS

A sample of 50 newborns without risk factors (well-babies) was tested within two weeks of birth. All had detectable auditory brainstem responses to clicks down to 40dB nHL in both ears. Two amplitude modulated carrier tones of 500 and 2,000Hz were mixed together and presented simultaneously. Each infant (and ear) was screened with the MSSR system; to simulate a hearing loss, a recording without stimulation was also obtained.

RESULTS

Mean auditory thresholds were 42.5±7dB HL at 500Hz and 35.5±6dB HL at 2,000Hz. The average duration of the MSSR recording was 2.6±1.6 minutes for each tested ear and the overall duration of the screening procedure (including electrode fitting and infant preparation) was 17.8±3.7 minutes. The diagnostic sensibility and the positive predictive values of the MSSR semi-automatic screening system was 100% and 96% respectively, with specificity of 96% and negative predictive values of 100%.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the diagnostic efficiency of the semi-automated MSSR system was found adequate, further technological improvements are still necessary to facilitate its use in the context of universal newborn hearing screening program.

Is discordance in TEOAE and AABR outcomes predictable in newborns?

OBJECTIVE

To determine the perinatal predictors of discordant screening outcomes based on a two-stage screening protocol with transient-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR).

METHODS

A cross-sectional study of infants tested with TEOAE and AABR under a hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening program in Lagos, Nigeria. Maternal and infant factors associated with discordant TEOAE and AABR outcomes were determined with multivariable logistic regression analyses adjusting for potential confounding factors.

RESULTS

Of the 4718 infants enrolled under the program 1745 (36.9%) completed both TEOAE and AABR. Of this group, 1060 (60.7%) passed both TEOAE and AABR ("true-negatives"); 92 (5.3%) failed both TEOAE and AABR ("true-positive"); 571 (32.7%) failed TEOAE but passed AABR ("false-positives") while 22 (1.3%) passed TEOAE but failed AABR ("false-negatives"). Infants with false-positives were likely to be admitted into well-baby nursery (p=0.001), belong to mothers who attended antenatal care (p=0.010) or who delivered vaginally (p<0.001) compared to infants with true-negatives while infants with true-positives were also more likely to be delivered vaginally (p=0.002) or admitted into well-baby nursery (p=0.035) compared to infants with false-negatives. Infants with true-positives were significantly more likely to be delivered vaginally (p<0.001) and have severe hyperbilirubinemia (p=0.045) compared with infants with true-negatives. No association was observed between false-negatives and true-negatives. Antenatal care status, mode of delivery and nursery type were useful predictors of discordant outcomes among all infants undergoing screening (c-statistic=0.73).

CONCLUSIONS

Given the available screening technologies, discordant TEOAE and AABR may be inevitable for some categories of hearing loss among apparently healthy newborns whose mothers received prenatal care. The potential limitations of perinatal morbidities as basis of targeted screening for such cases therefore merit further consideration.

A novel service delivery model for infant hearing screening in developing countries

Newborn hearing screening is the procedure of choice for ensuring optimal outcomes for infants with hearing loss, whether in a developed or developing country. Unfortunately, apart from a small number of recent exceptions, newborn hearing screening has been a practice reserved for the developed world. Despite the prevailing challenges towards implementing hearing screening in developing countries, there are existing structures in these countries that need to be investigated as possible platforms from which programs can be actualized. Immunization clinics, constituting part of a primary healthcare approach characteristic of developing countries, offer one such a platform. A novel service delivery model, based on initial results from a pilot study, was developed for infant hearing screening at immunization clinics in South Africa as an integrated part of primary, secondary, and tertiary levels of healthcare. This type of model is a first step toward ensuring that infants with hearing loss in developing communities are afforded opportunities for optimal development and societal integration through accountable and contextually relevant early hearing detection and intervention services.

Test accuracy and prognostic validity of multiple auditory steady state responses for targeted hearing screening

The test accuracy and prognostic validity of Multiple Auditory Steady State Responses (MSSR) and click Auditory Brainstem Responses (cABR) was compared within the context of a targeted screening protocol. A sample of 508 high-risk babies was first screened using cABR and MSSR (500 and 2000 Hz). All children (failed/ pass) were called back at three to four years of age to determine their hearing status (pure-tone audiometry). Although both methods showed an equally good test performance in the first screen (sensitivity: 100% and specificity: 92-95%), the MSSR may have some potential advantage to identify low-frequency hearing loss. Furthermore, the confirmatory audiometry with MSSR predicted the child hearing status more accurately than the cABR. In conclusion, the MSSR can provide valuable information for the diagnosis and management of infants earlier detected by a screening protocol and further developed might be also useful as a screening test.

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.

Comparison of universal newborn hearing screening programs in Illinois hospitals

SUMMARY/OBJECTIVES: In accordance with the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing's (JCIH, 2000) position statement regarding Universal Newborn Hearing Screenings (UNHS), the state of Illinois enacted legislation requiring all birthing hospitals to conduct UNHS by 31 December 2002. Currently 100% of birthing facilities in the state of Illinois perform newborn infant hearing screenings using otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) and/or automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) measures. This study is an attempt to document current practices in hospital-based UNHS programs, as reported by program personnel, in the state of Illinois. The goal is to compare these reported practices to the recommended standards and identify factors that could lead to further refinement of the process.

METHODS

A modified version of the Newborn Hearing Screening Survey from the Marion Downs National Center for Infant Hearing was used to gather practice- and protocol-related data for the 2004 calendar year via the World Wide Web. Data presented here are extracted from the online survey as reported by hospital staff presumably associated with the UNHS program.

RESULTS

Fifty-nine of the 140 hospitals with UNHS programs responded to the Web-based survey. Nursing staff, followed by technicians, were most commonly reported to perform initial hearing screenings in both the well-baby nursery (WBN) and the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Audiologists appeared to participate in re-screenings at a greater number of the facilities. Automated ABR was the most common screening tool (80%) followed by Distortion Product OAEs (32%) and Transient Evoked OAEs (5%). Eighty-six percent reported referral rates that were less than 5%, with 32% reporting a referral rate less than 1%.

CONCLUSIONS

At the beginning of 2004, 99% of all infants born in Illinois were being screened for hearing loss. Personnel involvement and screening measures employed were comparable to the few reports available from other states. The audiologist's role was found to be fairly limited in screening, re-screening, or managing UNHS programs. Referral rates were consistent with national standards ( approximately 1%). Management of UNHS programs in small, rural facilities, tracking/monitoring high-risk infants, and other services provided to families emerged as areas with room for improvement.

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.

Evaluation of vestibular function in young children

Together, these tests provide a full evaluation of vestibular function in infants and small children. If attention is paid to creating the appropriate testing environment, and interpretation of the tests takes into account the unique properties of the responses of infants and young children, this testing can provide a useful adjunct to audiometric evaluation in young children.