Outcome of Newborn Hearing Screening Programme delivered by health visitors

Coalition for Global Hearing Health Hearing Care Pathways Working Group: Guidelines for Clinical Guidance for Readiness and Development of Evidence-Based Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs

Editor's Note: The following article discusses the timely topic Clinical Guidance in the areas of Evidence-Based Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs. This article aims to discuss areas of services needed, guidance to countries/organizations attempting to initiate early hearing detection and intervention systems. Expert consensus and systematic/scoping reviews were combined to produce recommendations for evidence-based clinical practice. In Ear and Hearing, our long-term goal for the Point of View article is to stimulate the field's interest in and to enhance the appreciation of the author's area of expertise. Hearing is an important sense for children to develop cognitive, speech, language, and psychosocial skills. The goal of universal newborn hearing screening is to enable the detection of hearing loss in infants so that timely health and educational/therapeutic intervention can be provided as early as possible to improve outcomes. While many countries have implemented universal newborn hearing screening programs, many others are yet to start. As hearing screening is only the first step to identify children with hearing loss, many follow-up services are needed to help them thrive. However, not all of these services are universally available, even in high-income countries. The purposes of this article are (1) to discuss the areas of services needed in an integrated care system to support children with hearing loss and their families; (2) to provide guidance to countries/organizations attempting to initiate early hearing detection and intervention systems with the goal of meeting measurable benchmarks to assure quality; and (3) to help established programs expand and improve their services to support children with hearing loss to develop their full potential. Multiple databases were interrogated including PubMed, Medline (OVIDSP), Cochrane library, Google Scholar, Web of Science and One Search, ERIC, PsychInfo. Expert consensus and systematic/scoping reviews were combined to produce recommendations for evidence-based clinical practice. Eight essential areas were identified to be central to the integrated care: (1) hearing screening, (2) audiologic diagnosis and management, (3) amplification, (4) medical evaluation and management, (5) early intervention services, (6) family-to-family support, (7) D/deaf/hard of hearing leadership, and (8) data management. Checklists are provided to support the assessment of a country/organization's readiness and development in each area as well as to suggest alternative strategies for situations with limited resources. A three-tiered system (i.e., Basic, Intermediate, and Advanced) is proposed to help countries/organizations at all resource levels assess their readiness to provide the needed services and to improve their integrated care system. Future directions and policy implications are also discussed.

Universal neonatal hearing screening program in Shanghai, China: An inter-regional and international comparison

OBJECTIVE

By comparing the Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening (UNHS) program as implemented in Shanghai and other regions in China and countries around the world, this study makes an assessment of the Shanghai model and summarizes the experiences implementing the UNHS program, so as to provide a valuable reference for other countries or regions to carry out UNHS more effectively. Since Shanghai is one of the most developed regions in China, we also examined the relationship between economic development and the UNHS starting year and coverage rate.

METHODS

The study conducted a systematic review of published studies in Chinese and English on the program status of neonatal hearing screening to compare and analyze the implementation of the UNHS program in 20 cities or provinces in China and 24 regions or countries around the world. The literature search in Chinese was conducted in the three most authoritative publication databases, CNKI (China National Knowledge Infrastructure), WANFANGDATA, and CQVIP (http://www.cqvip.com/). We searched all publications in those databases with the keywords "neonatal hearing screening" (in Chinese) between 2005 and 2014. English literature was searched using the same keywords (in English). The publication database included Medline and Web of Science, and the search time period was 2000-2014.

RESULTS

Shanghai was one of the first regions in China to implement UNHS, and its coverage rate was among the top regions by international comparison. The starting time of the UNHS program had no relationship with the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) per capita in the same year. Economic level serves as a threshold for carrying out UNHS but is not a linear contributor to the exact starting time of such a program. The screening coverage rate generally showed a rising trend with the increasing GDP per capita in China, but it had no relationship with the area's GDP per capita in selected regions and countries around the world. The system design of UNHS is the key factor influencing screening coverage. Policy makers, program administrators, and cost-sharing structures are important factors that influence the coverage rates of UNHS.

CONCLUSION

When to carry out a UNHS program is determined by the willingness and preference of the local government, which is influenced by the area's social, political and cultural conditions. Mandatory hearing screening and minimal-cost to no-cost intervention are two pillars for a good coverage rate of UNHS. In terms of system design, decision-making, implementation, funding and the concrete implementation plan are all important factors affecting the implementation of the UNHS.

Quality indicators in a newborn hearing screening service

Introduction

Newborn hearing screening (NHS) programs are implemented across the globe to detect early hearing impairment. In order to meet this objective, the quality of these programs should be monitored using internationally recognized indicators.

Objective

To evaluate a newborn hearing screening service (NHSS) using international quality indicators.

Methods

A retrospective cohort study on the NHSS of Minas Gerais was conducted, analyzing the services performed between 2010 and 2011. Results were analyzed according to criteria from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing.

Results

This study assessed 6987 children. The proportions of cases that were referred for a retest, that followed through with retest, and that were referred for diagnosis were 8.0%, 71.9%, and 2.1%, respectively. The proportion of assessed newborn children in the first 30 days of life in this study was 65%. The median age of those children who failed both the NHS and the retest was significantly higher than the other children. The chance of a child with a hearing impairment risk indicator to fail the NHS was 2.4 times higher than of those without a risk indicator.

Conclusion

NHSS achieved three of four evaluated indicators. Despite this, it is still necessary to perform NHS earlier and to ensure that the subsequent steps are followed.

[Quality of universal newborn hearing screening results : Multicenter analysis of data recorded between 2009 and 2012 in four German states]

BACKGROUND

Bearing in mind the impending evaluation of newborn hearing screening in Germany, this study investigated whether multicenter analysis of the screening results from four German states is possible and to what extent the results meet national quality and outcome criteria.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The screening data from 170 hospitals and a total of 533,150 newborns (21 % of all German newborns) from 2009 to 2012 were evaluated according to definite rules and analyzed in terms of averages, as well as over time.

RESULTS

During the investigated period and averaged over the hospitals, the quality criteria "percentage of screened newborns" (91.4 %) and "percentage requiring further follow-up" (5.0 %), the "day of screening" (day 4), as well as the target parameter "age at diagnosis" (4.8 months) were not met. Steady improvements were observed over time: in the last year of the evaluation, 95.3 % of children were examined; only 4.8 % required follow-up and the age at diagnosis decreased to 4.2 months. On average, 83 % of the babies were screened before day 4. The steady reduction in variance of most of the variables from the participating hospitals indicates continual improvement.

CONCLUSION

A multicenter analysis of screening data is possible and valid in the case of good quality data.