Receipt and Timeliness of Newborn Hearing Screening and Diagnostic Services Among Babies Born in 2017 in 9 States

The Association of Race With Decreased Access to Pediatric Hearing Healthcare in the United States

Successful intervention to support a child with congenital hearing loss requires early identification and consistent access to frequent professional services. In the early 2000s, the United States implemented an initiative, Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI), to provide timely identification and treatment of congenital hearing loss. This national program aims to screen hearing by 1 month of age, diagnose hearing loss by 3 months of age, and provide intervention to infants with hearing loss by 6 months of age. To date, the United States is successfully implementing hearing screening by 1 month of age but continually struggling to diagnose and treat congenital hearing loss promptly for many infants. This article begins by exploring the current state of American children and families, focusing on social determinants of health, specifically race and poverty. The objective is to understand how race affects social determinants of health, and ultimately hearing healthcare access for children. A narrative literature review spanning public health, sociology, and hearing research was completed to inform this work. The current body of literature supports the conclusion that race and racism, separate from poverty, lead to decreased access to pediatric hearing healthcare. Interventions targeting these issues are necessary to improve timely access to hearing loss diagnosis and treatment for American children.

Newborn Screening for Neurodevelopmental Disorders May Exacerbate Health Disparities

Newborn screening (NBS) began in the early 1960s with screening for phenylketonuria on blood collected on filter paper. The number of conditions included in NBS programs expanded significantly with the adoption of tandem mass spectrometry. The recommended uniform screening panel provides national guidance and has reduced state variability. Universality and uniformity have been supported to promote equity. Recently, a number of researchers have suggested expanding NBS to include genomic sequencing to identify all genetic disorders in newborns. This has been specifically suggested for genes that increase the risk for neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs), with the presumption that early identification in the newborn period would reduce disabilities. We offer arguments to show that genomic sequencing of newborns for NDDs risks exacerbating disparities. First, the diagnosis of NDD requires clinical expertise, and both genetic and neurodevelopmental expertise are in short supply, leading to disparities in access to timely follow-up. Second, therapies for children with NDDs are insufficient to meet their needs. Increasing early identification for those at risk who may never manifest developmental delays could shift limited resources to those children whose parents are more poised to advocate, worsening disparities in access to services. Rather, we suggest an alternative: genomic sequencing of all children with diagnosed NDDs. This focused strategy would have the potential to target genomic sequencing at children who manifest NDDs across diverse populations which could better improve our understanding of contributory genes to NDDs.

Neonatal Hearing Rescreening in a Second-Level Hospital: Problems and Solutions

Second-level hospitals face peculiarities that make it difficult to implement hearing rescreening protocols, which is also common in other settings. This study analyzes the hearing rescreening process in these kinds of hospitals. A total of 1130 individuals were included; in this cohort, 61.07% were hospital newborns who failed their first otoacoustic emission test after birth (n = 679) or were unable to perform the test (n = 11), and who were then referred to an outpatient clinic. The remaining 38.93% were individuals born in another hospital with their first test conducted in the outpatient clinic (n = 440). A high number of rescreenings were made outside of the recommended time frame, mainly in children referred from another hospital. There was a high lost-to-follow-up rate, especially regarding otolaryngologist referrals. Neonatal hearing screening at second-level hospitals is difficult because of staffing and time constraints. This results in turnaround times that are longer than recommended, interfering with the timely detection of hearing loss. This is particularly serious in outpatient children with impaired screening. Referral to out-of-town centers leads to unacceptable follow-up loss. Legislative support for all these rescreening issues is necessary. In this article, these findings are discussed and some solutions are proposed.

Sociodemographic Factors Affecting Loss to Follow-Up After Newborn Hearing Screening: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

OBJECTIVE

Universal newborn hearing screening (NBHS) has been widely implemented as a part of early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) programs worldwide. Even with excellent provider knowledge and screening rates, many infants do not receive definitive hearing testing or intervention after initial screening. The objective of this study was to identify sociodemographic factors contributing to loss of follow-up.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, Scopus, and CINAHL.

REVIEW METHODS

Per Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, the databases were searched from the date of inception through December 28, 2021. Studies containing sociodemographic information on patients who were referred to NBHS were included. Meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) was performed comparing rates of sociodemographic variables between patients adherent and nonadherent to follow-up.

RESULTS

A total of 169,238 infants from 19 studies were included. Low birth weight (OR 1.6 [95% confidence interval, CI 1.2-2.2, p < .001), racial minority (OR 1.4 [95% CI 1.2-1.6], p < .001), rural residence (OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.1-1.9], p = .005), lack of insurance (OR 1 [95% CI 1.4-2.5], p < .001), and public or state insurance (OR 1.7 [95% CI 1.2-4.2], p = .008) were associated with missed follow-up after referred NBHS. Associated maternal factors included low maternal education (OR 1.8 [95% CI 1.6-2.0], p < .001), young maternal age (OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.5-1.6], p < .001), unmarried maternal status (OR 1.5 [95% CI 1.1-1.9], p = .003), and current or former maternal smoking status (OR 1.8 [95% CI 1.4-2.2], p < .001).

CONCLUSION

Both infant and maternal sociodemographic factors influence follow-up compliance after referred NBHS. Focused efforts should be made by medical providers and policymakers to address these factors to ensure appropriate newborn hearing care and interventions are achieved.

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.

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.

Evaluating Equity Through the Social Determinants of Hearing Health

Hearing loss in adults is a significant public health problem throughout the world. Undiagnosed and untreated hearing loss causes a measurable impact on health and social, occupational, and emotional well-being of those affected. In spite of a wide array of health care resources to identify and manage hearing loss, there exist vast disparities in outcomes, as well as access to and utilization of hearing healthcare. Hearing rehabilitation outcomes may vary widely among different populations and there is a pressing need to understand, in a broader sense, the factors that influence equitable outcomes, access, and utilization. These factors can be categorized according to the widely accepted framework of social determinants of health, which is defined by the World Health Organization as "the conditions in which people are born, grow, work, live, and age." According to Healthy People 2030, these determinants can be broken into the following domains: healthcare access and quality, education access and quality, social and community context, economic stability, and neighborhood and built environment. This article defines these domains and examines the published research and the gaps in research of each of these domains, as it pertains to hearing health and healthcare. Herein, we review foundational sources on the social determinants of health and hearing-related research focused on the topic. Further consideration is given to how these factors can be evaluated in a systematic fashion and be incorporated into translational research and hearing health care.