Examining Barriers to Early Hearing Diagnosis

PURPOSE

Many factors create barriers for early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI), especially those related to unfavorable social determinants of health (SDOH). The primary aim of this study was to evaluate diagnostic timing of infants at risk for congenital hearing loss in consideration of known barriers. Understanding the specific barriers to early diagnosis can inform interventions to improve timeliness of diagnosis and subsequent habilitation.

METHOD

A retrospective chart review was completed for infants referred for diagnostic audiologic testing at a tertiary urban-setting Children's Hospital from 2018 to 2021. After exclusion criteria were applied, 1,488 infants were included in the analysis. Various factors were recorded from electronic medical records including those specific to SDOH. Time to diagnosis was derived and compared across five factors of interest that have previously been shown to impact diagnostic timeline, including (a) insurance type, (b) race/ethnicity, (c) presence of middle ear dysfunction at first auditory brainstem response (ABR), (d) proximity to diagnostic center, and (e) diagnostic timing before and during/after the COVID-19 pandemic.

RESULTS

Across the study time period, 77% of infants referred for diagnostic testing had confirmed diagnosis by the EHDI benchmark of 3 months. Analysis of time to diagnosis across factors of interest revealed no clinically significant differences for insurance type, race/ethnicity, proximity to diagnostic center, or timing in reference to the COVID-19 pandemic. Presence of middle ear dysfunction on first ABR was found to significantly protract final diagnostic timing.

CONCLUSIONS

Although some known barriers for EHDI can be universal, other factors may have a differential impact on an infant's timeline to diagnosis based on their specific location, which can interact differently with additional known barriers. Understanding local challenges will serve to better guide programs in implementing facilitators that will address their specific needs for improved outcomes.

Factors that influence health service access in deaf and hard-of-hearing children: a narrative review

OBJECTIVES

Early diagnosis and intervention of deaf and hard-of-hearing (DHH) children leads to improved language and psychosocial outcomes. However, many child, parent and provider related factors can influence access to early intervention services, including hearing devices. This narrative review aims to explore factors that influence health service access in DHH children.

DESIGN

A systematic search was conducted to identify articles that explored factors that influenced health service access in DHH children in countries with Universal Newborn Hearing Screening, published between 2010 and 2022.

STUDY SAMPLES

Fifty-nine articles met the inclusion criteria for data extraction. This included 4 systematic reviews, 2 reviews, 39 quantitative and 5 mixed methods studies and 9 qualitative studies.

RESULTS

The identified factors were grouped into the following themes: (a) demographic factors, (b) family related factors, (c) child related factors, (d) factors specific to hearing devices, (e) service delivery, f) telehealth and (g) COVID-19.

CONCLUSION

This review provided a comprehensive summary of multiple factors that affect access to health services in DHH children. Psychosocial support, consistent clinical advice, allocation of resources to rural communities and use of telehealth are possible ways to address barriers and improve health service access.

Modeling Lost to Intervention in Early Hearing Detection and Intervention: A Modified eDelphi Study

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to develop a functional model of the drivers behind why families may decline early intervention services following the identification of a child as D/deaf or hard of hearing.

METHOD

This model was developed using a modified eDelphi method. Invited experts (N = 155) were provided proposed models of why families may decline early intervention services in accordance with current literature. In the first phase of feedback, participants (n = 23) provided changes they would make to the model to be more in line with their perceptions of lost to intervention. These changes were implemented, and a second phase of feedback with participants (n = 25) moved to accept the model as presented.

RESULTS

Agreement was reached on five main barriers to early intervention access for children who have been identified as D/deaf or hard of hearing (family experience, family culture, perceived vulnerability, perceived benefits, and perceived barriers). Each of these main barriers has associated examples of how they may manifest across different early intervention programs and situations.

CONCLUSIONS

This is the first theoretical model of why loss to intervention happens within early hearing detection and intervention. Having a model provides the opportunity for future work to implement novel approaches to support families during the early intervention enrollment process.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention in the United States: A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVES

Early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) is guided by the 1-3-6 approach: screening by one month, diagnosis by 3 mo, and early intervention (EI) enrollment by 6 mo. Although screening rates remain high, successful diagnosis and EI-enrollment lag in comparison. The aim of this systematic review is to critically examine and synthesize the barriers to and facilitators of EHDI that exist for families, as they navigate the journey of congenital hearing loss diagnosis and management in the United States. Understanding barriers across each and all stages is necessary for EHDI stakeholders to develop and test novel approaches which will effectively reduce barriers to early hearing healthcare.

DESIGN

A systematic literature search was completed in May and August 2021 for empirical articles focusing on screening, diagnosis, and EI of children with hearing loss. Two independent reviewers completed title and abstract screening, full-text review, data extraction, and quality assessments with a third independent reviewer establishing consensus at each stage. Data synthesis was completed using the Framework Analysis approach to categorize articles into EHDI journey timepoints and individual/family-level factors versus system-level factors.

RESULTS

Sixty-two studies were included in the narrative synthesis. Results revealed that both individual/family-level (e.g., economic stability, medical status of the infant including middle ear involvement) and system-level barriers (e.g., system-service capacity, provider knowledge, and program quality) hinder timely diagnosis and EI for congenital hearing loss. Specific social determinants of health were noted as barriers to effective EHDI; however, system-level facilitators such as care coordination, colocation of services, and family support programs have been shown to mitigate the negative impact of those sociodemographic factors.

CONCLUSIONS

Many barriers exist for families to obtain appropriate and timely EHDI for their children, but system-level changes could facilitate the process and contribute to long-term outcomes improvement. Limitations of this study include limited generalizability due to the heterogeneity of EHDI programs and an inability to ascertain factor interactions.

Exploring the Stories of Parents' Experiences With Infant Hearing-Loss Screening and Diagnosis in the United States

OBJECTIVES

For the past 20 years, birthing hospitals in the United States have required newborns to undergo a hearing-loss screening before leaving the hospital. Since the initial newborn hearing screening mandates, there has been much outcome research documenting the successes and barriers of the programs. However, we know little about the experiences of their parents during the time between screening and diagnosis. We propose that elucidating the parents' experiences with newborn hearing-loss screening and diagnosis-via their own stories-is a first step toward understanding their varied experiences and has the potential to ultimately improve hearing healthcare for both children and their families. Thus, to better understand the early hearing screening and detection experience from hearing parents' perspectives, we asked the following research question: what are parents' experiences with their newborns' hearing-loss screening and diagnosis in the United States?

DESIGN

The present study employed a prospective, cross-sectional qualitative design. Specifically, we gathered stories from 13 hearing parents who each have a child born in the United States and diagnosed with hearing loss no later than 14 mo of age between the years of 2016 and 2020. We used thematic analysis to uncover common themes across parent narratives. Saturation was reached at interview no. 4; thus no further sampling was needed.

FINDINGS

Two major themes emerged from the data: (1) hearing healthcare experiences and (2) parents' early experiences during the period between their child's newborn hearing-loss screening and diagnosis. Subthemes were also uncovered. Three emergent subthemes related to health-care experiences included: (1) downplayed newborn hearing screening referrals, (2) clinician-centered care, and (3) medical expenses and health coverage. The three subthemes of the second theme were as follows: (1) parent-to-parent support, (2) "mom guilt," and (3) a new reality.

CONCLUSION

The present study's narrative accounts from parents about their infants' early hearing detection experiences revealed several, different subthemes that emerged from the same, mandated newborn experience in US families. These findings highlight important moments throughout the hearing-loss screening and detection process, which could benefit from more effective, family-centered hearing healthcare. This knowledge also facilitates the field's move toward improved education of future and current providers and regarding family-centered approach, which could address concerns and expectations of new parents at the very start of their newborns' hearing-loss journeys.

Analysis of Health Disparities in the Screening and Diagnosis of Hearing Loss: Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Hearing Screening Follow-Up Survey

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to (a) provide introductory literature regarding cultural constructs, health disparities, and social determinants of health (SDoH); (b) summarize the literature regarding the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) Hearing Screening Follow-Up Survey (HSFS) data; (c) explore the CDC EHDI HSFS data regarding the contribution of maternal demographics to loss-to-follow-up/loss-to-documentation (LTF/D) between hearing screening and audiologic diagnosis for 2016, 2017, and 2018; and (d) examine these health disparities within the context of potential ethnoracial biases.

METHOD

This is a comprehensive narrative literature review of cultural constructs, hearing health disparities, and SDoH as they relate to the CDC EHDI HSFS data. We explore the maternal demographic data reported on the CDC EHDI website and report disparities for maternal age, education, ethnicity, and race for 2016, 2017, and 2018. We focus on LTF/D for screening and diagnosis within the context of racial and cultural bias.

RESULTS

A literature review demonstrates the increase in quality of the CDC EHDI HSFS data over the past 2 decades. LTF/D rates for hearing screening and audiologic diagnostic testing have improved from higher than 60% to current rates of less than 30%. Comparisons of diagnostic completion rates reported on the CDC website for the EHDI HSFS 2016, 2017, and 2018 data show trends for maternal age, education, and race, but not for ethnicity. Trends were defined as changes more than 10% for variables averaged over a 3-year period (2016-2018).

CONCLUSIONS

Although there have been significant improvements in LTF/D over the past 2 decades, there continue to be opportunities for further improvement. Beyond neonatal screening, delays continue to be reported in the diagnosis of young children with hearing loss. Notwithstanding the extraordinarily diverse families within the United States, the imperative is to minimize such delays so that all children with hearing loss can, at the very least, have auditory accessibility to spoken language by 3 months of age. Conscious awareness is essential before developing a potentially effective plan of action that might remediate the problem.

An Integrative Review of Current Practice Models and/or Process of Family-Centered Early Intervention for Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing

Over the past few decades, there has been an increasing shift toward emphasizing the importance of the child's family taking an active role in the habilitation process through family-centered early intervention (FCEI) programs. Accordingly, the Health Professions Council of South Africa recommends that early intervention services following confirmation of hearing loss must be family-centered within a community-based model of service delivery that is culturally congruent. The aim of this study was to explore and document current evidence reflecting trends in FCEI for children who are deaf or hard of hearing (DHH) by identifying and describing current practice models and/or processes of FCEI for these children. This study describes our first steps in formulating a framework for FCEI for children who are DHH in South Africa. An integrative literature review was conducted. Sage, Science Direct, PubMed, and Google Scholar databases were searched for studies published in English between January 2009 and January 2019 reporting on FCEI programs for children who are DHH. Studies that focused on the following were excluded from the study: speech and language outcomes of children, youth, and adults who are DHH; education for children who are DHH; universal newborn hearing screening; professionals' roles in early hearing detection and intervention; diagnosis of hearing loss; and sign language. Kappa statistics were performed to determine agreement between reviewers. Twenty-two studies were included in the review. Cohen's kappa revealed a substantial agreement (κ = 0.8) between reviewers for data extraction and synthesis in terms of the articles that met the criteria for inclusion in the review. Findings were discussed under 5 themes: caregiver involvement; caregiver coaching/information sharing; caregiver satisfaction; challenges with FCEI; and telehealth. Generally, there is sufficient evidence for FCEI, with caregivers indicating the need for full involvement in their children's care. Methods of caregiver involvement involving caregiver coaching/information sharing need to be culturally and linguistically appropriate, with sensitivities around time and manner. This increases caregiver satisfaction with intervention programs and improves outcomes for children who are DHH. Challenges identified by the studies raise implications for early hearing detection and intervention programs, as well as Departments of Health and Social Welfare. These included logistical challenges, professional-related challenges, and caregiver-related challenges. Various aspects of FCEI have been reported in the review. Findings of these studies have significant implications for the formulation of quality FCEI programs to ensure contextually relevant and contextually responsive care of children who are DHH.

Family-Centered Care in the Transition to Early Hearing Intervention

This study aimed to explore and compare families' and professionals' perspectives on the implementation of family-centered care (FCC) (Moeller, Carr, Seaver, Stredler-Brown, & Holzinger, 2013) during the period between diagnosis of hearing loss (HL) and enrollment in early intervention (EI). A convergent mixed-methods study incorporating self-report questionnaires and semistructured in-depth interviews was used. Seventeen family members of children with HL and the 11 professionals who support these families participated in this study. The results suggested that the services engaged during the transition period partially adhered to the principles of FCC, including the provision of timely access to EI services and provision of emotional and social support. However, areas for improvement identified include strengthening family/professional partnerships, shared decision-making processes, collaborative teamwork, program monitoring, and consistency in the provision of information and support. Qualitative and quantitative research findings also indicated a lack of consistency in service provision during the transition period.

After a first prelingually deaf child, does the family learn a lesson?

BACKGROUND

Congenital sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) is a common disability in children. It can affect normal language development and educational achievement. Today, the time to cochlear implant is delayed for many children, which in turn delays intervention and impacts outcomes. Lack of knowledge and experience with congenital SNHL in the family are critical factors that can delay identification and intervention.

OBJECTIVES

Compare treatment seeking behavior in families for a first and second congenitally deaf child.

DESIGN

Analytical, cross-sectional using medical record data.

SETTING

Ear specialist hospital in Riyadh.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

All patients who presented to the cochlear implant committee from March 2016 to March 2018 and met criteria were included in the study. Data on when the subjects presented to hospital and were approved for cochlear implant were retrieved from the patient files and through phone calls to the family. The age of first suspicion, audiological testing, diagnosis, hearing aid fitting, and the decision for cochlear implant were compared between the first and second child in families with multiple children with congenital SNHL.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

The timing difference between the first and second deaf child in seeking treatment.

SAMPLE SIZE

116 (58 pairs).

RESULTS

The second child was suspected to have hearing loss 13.6 months earlier than the first child and presented to the cochlear implant committee for final decision 16.7 months earlier than his\her sibling. Differences in the mean ages at suspicion of hearing loss, presentation to the hospital for audiological evaluation, hearing aid fitting, diagnosis, and decision for cochlear implant by cochlear implant committee were statistically significant ( P<.001).

CONCLUSION

Experience and knowledge has a major effect on early identification. We need to implement educational programs for the public to increase awareness of how to recognize a deaf child and what steps to take.

LIMITATIONS

Single-centered.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST

None.

Parent perspectives on multidisciplinary pediatric hearing healthcare

INTRODUCTION

Family-centered healthcare demands that families provide input regarding the care of their children. Very little is known, however, about how families perceive their experience in different types of multidisciplinary team models, and specifically, in the multidisciplinary setting currently utilized in many pediatric hearing clinics.

METHODS

Quantitative and qualitative parent survey responses were collected and analyzed in a tertiary care pediatric medical center after a one-day multidisciplinary assessment clinical appointment. Questions pertained to information across five domains, including overall experience, diagnosis, treatment plan formulation, additional testing, and resources. Quantitative responses were analyzed descriptively while qualitative responses were evaluated using content analysis to derive themes. Quantitative and qualitative data were evaluated separately and then compared to delineate themes for strengths and weaknesses.

RESULTS

Overall, high satisfaction was evident in both quantitative and qualitative responses. Results suggested that a one-day multidisciplinary assessment appointment may contribute to parents feeling overwhelmed by information shared and not fully understanding which disciplines are providing care. Analysis revealed a specific area of weakness in our particular setting was inadequate provision of information about functional hearing (e.g., listening socially and academically). Results contributed to a change from a multidisciplinary team model to an interdisciplinary care coordination approach to pediatric hearing healthcare.

CONCLUSIONS

Understanding parent perspectives and expectations is the corner stone of family-centered care and may ultimately influence a child's developmental outcome. A systematic way of evaluating parent perspectives on the clinical process can influence service delivery and help children with hearing loss meet their potential.

Improving early audiological intervention via newborn hearing screening in Belgium

BACKGROUND

Newborn hearing screening programs aim to lower the ages at audiological intervention among hearing-impaired children. In Wallonia and Brussels (Belgium), audiological intervention data are not collected in the screening program, and the ages at initiating audiological care have never been assessed. This study aimed to assess the evolution in the ages at initiating audiological intervention in the context of a newborn hearing screening program implementation.

METHODS

This population-based descriptive study used data from the Belgian healthcare billing database. The main outcomes were the children's ages at the initial audiological assessment, hearing-aid fitting, and cochlear implantation. Results were compared to the same outcomes from another Belgian regional program (Flanders) that was implemented one decade earlier. Annual birth cohorts from 2006 to 2011 were included in the study.

RESULTS

In Wallonia-Brussels, the median ages for all outcomes tended to decrease over time but remained higher than in Flanders for each birth cohort. For all outcomes except the hearing-aid fitting, differences in median ages between the two regions became less pronounced during the study period. In 2006, < 23% of the children from Wallonia-Brussels received any audiological care before the age of 12 months and these proportions were approximately 2-fold greater in the subsequent birth cohorts. For all outcomes, early care (< 12 months) was typically delivered less frequently in Wallonia-Brussels, compared to the delivery in Flanders. These region-specific differences exhibited a decreasing trend over time, and statistically significant differences were less common in the later birth cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that the hearing screening program in Wallonia and Brussels promoted earlier audiological intervention among hearing-impaired children. However, milestones recommended by experts for an early intervention were not totally encountered. We also recommend collecting audiological intervention data as part of this program, which can facilitate more accurate and regular program evaluation.

Diagnostic hearing testing of infants aged 0-36 months in 3 South African provinces - Comparison of audiology records to HPCSA guidelines

INTRODUCTION

Within the Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) pathway, which includes the processes of screening, diagnosis and intervention for paediatric hearing loss, paediatric diagnostic audiology involves a battery of specific tests and procedures. International studies have highlighted a golden standard for diagnosis of paediatric hearing loss as based on the Joint Committee of Infant Hearing (2007) diagnostic guidelines, closely resembling the HPCSA diagnostic guidelines. There are limited South African studies on the processes and protocols followed in diagnostic paediatric audiology.

OBJECTIVES

This study aims to provide a comparison for how the tests used for diagnosis of paediatric hearing loss in South Africa (within both the public and private healthcare sectors) compare to the HPCSA recommended diagnostic guidelines.

METHODS

A retrospective record review of paediatric clients with hearing loss (recruited through nonprobability convenience sampling) was conducted. This study is part of a longitudinal study of 711 deaf or hard of hearing children referred to the HI HOPES early intervention programme from September 2006 to December 2011. Diagnostic data from audiology reports of 117 children between 0 and 36 months were coded and analysed.

RESULTS

Large variation was found in the tests included in the diagnostic audiology reports. For 22 children (19%) a comprehensive test battery was used. Health Professions Council of South Africa (HPCSA) recommended guidelines for diagnostic testing were not followed in any of the records analysed. Components of the HPCSA recommended test battery most frequently omitted was bone conduction testing. For both electrophysiology and behavioural testing, there was limited frequency specificity information. This exclusion of information is evidence of deficiencies in data recording and management, as well as having an effect on accuracy of classification of degree and type of hearing loss.

CONCLUSION

There are gaps in age-appropriate assessment protocols, which will have an effect on accurate differential diagnosis of paediatric hearing loss. Reasons for not including all testing components of the HPCSA recommended guidelines, as well as the possibility of developing guidelines more relevant to a developing world context, should be explored. There might be a need for. The impact of South African specific factors that have an effect on provision of accurate paediatric diagnostic audiology services should be determined.

Deaf or hard of hearing children in Saudi Arabia: Status of early intervention services

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to determine the status of early intervention services provided to children who are deaf or hard of hearing and their parents/caregivers from birth to five years of age at two main state hospitals in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, based on their parents' perceptions.

METHOD

A descriptive quantitative research design was used to determine the status of early intervention services for deaf or hard of hearing children in Saudi Arabia based on their parents' perceptions. Semistructured interviews based on a questionnaire were conducted with 60 research participants from two main state hospitals where early detection and intervention services are provided. A purposive sampling technique was employed. Descriptive and inferential statistical analyses were performed on the data collected.

RESULTS

The participants' children were diagnosed at a substantially late age, resulting in delayed ages for initial hearing aid fitting and enrolment in early intervention services. A significant relationship was found between the residential area of the participants and timely access to intervention services. The results indicated that participants residing in Riyadh were fitted with hearing aids and enrolled into EI services earlier than those living outside of Riyadh. The delivery of information also emerged as a weakness in the EI system for the majority of participants.

CONCLUSION

The findings of the study suggested that limited services of detection and intervention for deaf or hard of hearing children and residential area of participants are likely to be barriers to early access to intervention services. It is proposed that the benefits of UNHS accompanied by appropriate early intervention services should be made available in all regions throughout Saudi Arabia.

Revised Conceptual Framework of Parent-to-Parent Support for Parents of Children Who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing: A Modified Delphi Study

BACKGROUND

A scoping review of the literature was conducted, resulting in the development of a conceptual framework of parent-to-parent support for parents with children who are Deaf or hard of hearing. This is the 2nd stage of a dual-stage scoping review.

PURPOSE

This study sought stakeholder opinion and feedback with an aim to achieve consensus on the constructs, components, and design of the initial conceptual framework.

RESEARCH DESIGN

A modified electronic Delphi study was completed with 21 handpicked experts from 7 countries who have experience in provision, research, or experience in the area of parent-to-parent support. Participants completed an online questionnaire using an 11-point Likert scale (strongly disagree to strongly agree) and open-ended questions to answer various questions related to the descriptor terms, definitions, constructs, components, and overall design of the framework.

RESULTS

Participant responses led to the revision of the original conceptual framework.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this dual-stage scoping review and electronic Delphi study provide a conceptual framework that defines the vital contribution of parents in Early Hearing Detection and Intervention programs that will be a useful addition to these programs.

Parent Perception of Newborn Hearing Screening: Results of a US National Survey

IMPORTANCE

An unacceptably high number of children who do not pass universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) are lost to follow-up.

OBJECTIVES

To provide insight into parent recall of UNHS.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

In this nationally representative cross-sectional survey, 2144 US parent households were surveyed in May 2012 using the Knowledge Panel. Responses of parents whose children were born before vs after UNHS implementation were compared.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Outcome measures included recall of hearing screen at birth, hearing screen results, and recommendations for follow-up. All outcome measures were based on parent recall and report. Descriptive statistics and multiple logistic regression analyses were used.

RESULTS

The study participants included 1539 parent households and 605 nonparent households. Of the 1539 parent households surveyed, the mean age of the parents was 38.8 years (range, 18-88 years), the mean age of the children was 10.2 years (range, 0-17 years), and the mean age of children with hearing loss was 12.1 years (range, 0-17 years). A total of 1539 parents (55.8%) were women. Only 62.9% of parents (unweighted n = 950) recalled a newborn hearing screen, and among those children with risk indicators for hearing loss (n = 587), only 68.6% (unweighted n = 385) recalled a hearing screen. Higher parent educational level (odds ratio [OR], 2.27; 95% CI, 1.17-4.41, for some college and OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.22-4.78, for a bachelor's degree; P = .03), younger age of the child (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.11-1.23; P < .001), and the presence of any risk indicator for hearing loss (OR, 1.5; 95% CI, 1.13-2.13; P = .007) were associated with parent recall of hearing screen. Reported pass rates were higher than expected. Parent recall of follow-up recommendations was not always consistent with guidelines.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Although this study is inherently limited by recall bias, the findings indicate a lack of parent awareness of UNHS. Changes in the system of reporting UNHS results are necessary to improve parent recall of screen results and improve follow-up for children who do not pass the screen.

Paediatric diagnostic audiology testing in South Africa

INTRODUCTION

With the increased emphasis on the importance of early identification of paediatric hearing loss within developing countries such as South Africa and Nigeria there has been a recognition of the ethical obligation to ensure access to timely diagnostic and intervention services for children identified with hearing loss; regardless of their geographic or socioeconomic status. There are limited studies on diagnosis of paediatric hearing loss in a developing world context.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine processes used for diagnosis of paediatric hearing loss in South Africa, across the private and public healthcare sectors, and to profile the age of testing for each component of the diagnostic test battery.

METHODS

Diagnostic audiology testing data of 230 children enrolled in an early intervention programme was analysed to profile the reporting of diagnostic audiology testing as well as diagnostic audiology procedures employed. Results were analysed according to province as well as healthcare sector to compare diagnostic services across regions as well as healthcare sectors.

RESULTS

The differences in audiology practice and tests employed with paediatric clients across the regions of Gauteng, Kwazulu Natal and Western Cape indicates that services across regions and across the public and private sector are not equitable. Each region is equally unlikely to complete a full, comprehensive diagnostic evaluation on paediatric clients. The age of testing highlights the increased age of diagnosis of hearing loss.

CONCLUSION

Paediatric diagnostic audiology is a section of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention services that requires attention in terms of the appropriateness of procedures as well as equity of services. Further studies on diagnostic practice and resources in South Africa will provide information on factors that are preventing adherence to international best practice guidelines for paediatric diagnostic audiology.

Narrative review of EHDI in South Africa

Background

With 17 babies born with hearing loss every day in South Africa, there is a pressing need for systematic Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) services. Progress is being made in offering newborn hearing screening and studies have been conducted to document these processes within South Africa. However, due to the lack of a national and holistic overview of EHDI services to date, an accurate picture of the current status of EHDI within the South African context is required.

Objective

To document and profile what has been published within the field of EHDI in South Africa over the last two decades (Jan 1995–Sept 2014) in order to gain a comprehensive overview of the current status and practice of screening and diagnosis in the field of paediatric hearing loss.

Method

A narrative review of peer-reviewed articles related to EHDI in South Africa was conducted by searching the EBSCOHOST, SCOPUS and JSTOR databases for the period January 1995 to September 2014.

Results

Results indicate that over the last two decades research and publications in the field of EHDI have increased considerably. These publications have revealed extensive knowledge related to paediatric hearing screening and intervention services in South Africa; however, this knowledge seems to be limited primarily to the provinces of Gauteng and the Western Cape. Furthermore, studies pertaining to diagnosis have revealed that, although much has been written on the scientific aspects on tools for diagnosis of hearing loss, there is a lack of comprehensive information on diagnostic protocols and procedures.

Conclusion

Despite the clear progress being made in South Africa in the field of early hearing detection and intervention, there is a need for comprehensive studies on protocols and procedures in diagnosing paediatric hearing loss. Finally, the narrative review revealed a clear need to ensure that development and growth in the field of EHDI is a national priority and extends beyond the two provinces currently showing growth.

Parent-to-parent support for parents with children who are deaf or hard of hearing: a conceptual framework

BACKGROUND

Parent-to-parent support for parents with children who are deaf or hard of hearing (D/HH) is identified as an important component of Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs for children with hearing loss.

PURPOSE

The specific aim of this review was to identify the constructs and components of parent-to-parent support for parents of children who are D/HH.

RESEARCH DESIGN

An extensive scoping literature review identified 39 peer-reviewed articles published from 2000 to 2014. Studies were selected and reviewed based on standardized procedures.

RESULTS

Data were identified, extracted, and organized into libraries of thematic and descriptive content. A conceptual framework of parent-to-parent support for parents of children who are D/HH was developed and presented in a comprehensive, bidirectional informational graphic. The constructs and components of the conceptual framework are (a) well-being: parent, family, and child; (b) knowledge: advocacy, system navigation, and education; and (c) empowerment: confidence and competence.

CONCLUSION

The findings from this scoping review led to the development of a structured conceptual framework of parent-to-parent support for parents of children who are D/HH. The conceptual framework provides an important opportunity to explore and clearly define the vital contribution of parents in EHDI programs.