Neonatal at risk screening and the identification of deafness

Knowledge and Practice of Hearing Screening and Hearing Loss Management among Ear, Nose, and Throat Physicians in Jordan

Introduction  One of the main factors that affect the early diagnosis and intervention of hearing loss is inadequate knowledge by the health care workers. Ear, nose, and throat (ENT) specialists are the main source of information about hearing loss and its management in most developing countries, such as Jordan. Objective  The purpose of the present study is to explore the level of knowledge and the practice of hearing screening and hearing loss management for children among ENT physicians in Jordan as an example of health care providers in developing countries of the Middle East. Methods  This was a cross-sectional study, adapting a questionnaire of knowledge and the practice of hearing screening and hearing loss management for children. The questionnaire consisted of 2 sections with 20 questions. A total of 40 ENT physicians completed the questionnaire. Results  The majority of the respondents acknowledged the importance of hearing screening for children; however, there was limited knowledge regarding hearing loss management and testing. Only 10 of the ENT physicians believed that a referral to an audiologist is warranted, and the majority of the respondents were not aware that a child with a confirmed permanent hearing loss should be referred to a speech pathologist or to a rehabilitation center. Managing unilateral and mild sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) was another area about which ENT physicians have limited knowledge. Conclusion  There is a strong need for professional intervention programs, providing the latest updates and standardizations in the field of audiology and pediatric rehabilitation for ENT physicians.

The Effect of Age at Cochlear Implantation on Speech and Auditory Performances in Prelingually Deaf Children

To understand the effect of age at implantation on speech and auditory performances of 74 prelingually deaf Indian children after using cochlear implants for 3, 6 and 12 months. We also evaluate the causes of late implantation in this population. Seventy four children who underwent cochlear implantation from December 2013 to December 2015 in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head Neck Cancer in SMS Medical College, Jaipur were participated in this study. To compare the efficacy of cochlear implant, candidates are classified into 2 groups according to the age at the time of implantation: 1-4 years and 4.1-7 years. The sample size is 37 in both age groups. Their auditory performance and speech intelligibility were rated using the Revised Categories of Auditory Perception scales, Speech Intelligibility Rating scales and Meaningful Auditory Integration Scale. The evaluations were made before implantation and 3, 6 and 12 months after implantation. The scores when compared in both the groups revealed that the results were comparable and significant after 12 months of follow up while the scores were not significant after 3 and 6 months. The results were statistically significant when baseline is compared with different postoperative stages. The children implanted before the age of 4 years had significantly better auditory and linguistic performances. At least 12 months of audio-verbal rehabilitation and speech and language therapy are required to compare the effects of cochlear implant in any set of children. Our study shows that hearing impaired children who receive cochlear implantation below 4 years of age acquires better auditory ability for developing language skills.

Screening of Newborn Hearing at a Tertiary Care Hospital in South India

Hearing loss can have a devastating impact on the cognitive development and psychological well-being of children and their families. Newborn hearing screening should be given special attention especially in a country like ours where the burden of this disability is heavy. Screening all newborns irrespective of risk factors helps in better detection, and hence further management can be initiated at appropriate time. To implement newborn hearing screening at Vanivilas hospital and to estimate the incidence of hearing loss among the high risk groups. To create awareness about the need for detecting childhood deafness among parents and general population. To develop a centre of excellence for evaluation, intervention and rehabilitation for hearing impaired in a tertiary care hospital. Prospective study. All neonates born in Vanivilas Hospital attached to Bangalore Medical College and Research Institute underwent hearing screening using four stage protocols with otoacoustic emission (OAE) tests and final confirmation with Brainstem evoked response audiometry (BERA) tests. May 2015-May 2017. Number of newborns screened were 26,487, and 19 (0.717/1000) newborns were detected to have hearing impairment. The incidence of hearing loss among high risk group was 0.188/1000, and among the non risk group was 0.528/1000. Newborn hearing screening must be made mandatory and multi-staged protocol based screening for hearing loss should be implemented. This will make newborn screening programme more efficient and also will help in initiating treatment at an early stage so that further damage can be prevented.

Risk Factors for Sensorineural Hearing Loss Among High-Risk Infants in Golestan Province, Iran in 2010 - 2011

Background:

Hearing impairment, as one of the most common birth defects, is a hidden disability with negative impacts on speech and cognitive development.

Objectives:

The aim of this study was to assess the prevalence of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) and determine the associated risk factors among infants admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and neonatal wards of teaching hospitals, affiliated to Golestan University of Medical Sciences, Gorgan, Iran.

Patients and Methods:

In this cross-sectional study, 791 infants were recruited via non-random sampling. Demographic and clinical characteristics of the subjects were gathered, and the Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR) test was performed upon admission. Afterwards, the subjects were followed-up and re-assessed, using the AABR test. For infants with abnormal AABR results, the Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) test was performed on the day of discharge.

Results:

The mean age of the infants was 3.75 ± 4.86 days upon admission, and 56.4% of the subjects were female. The mean length of hospital stay was 9.63 ± 1.1 days; the subjects were hospitalized for 3.50 ± 10.21 days in the NICUs and 6.1 ± 5.27 days in the neonatal wards. In total, 3.4% of the infants presented with SNHL. No significant difference was found between SNHL and neonates’ age (P = 0.52), sex (P = 0.5), or sepsis (P = 0.94). However, SNHL was significantly associated with gestational age (P = 0.045), birth weight (P < 0.001), length of hospital stay (P < 0.001), pathological jaundice (P=0.033), antibiotic treatments (P = 0.007), and total serum bilirubin level (P = 0.01). Additionally, binary logistic regression analysis demonstrated the association between SNHL and these factors.

Conclusions:

In this study, the prevalence of SNHL among hospitalized neonates was similar to previous reports in Iran and other countries. Based on the findings, administration of ototoxic drugs during the neonatal period can lead to SNHL. Therefore, it seems essential to regularly screen newborns under treatment and limit the indiscriminate use of ototoxic drugs.

Delayed-onset hearing loss in pediatric candidates for cochlear implantation

The objective of this study was to evaluate the clinical significance of delayed-onset hearing loss in children. Seventy-three children who underwent cochlear implantation (CI) were included. They were divided into a congenital hearing loss group (n = 50) and a delayed-onset hearing loss group (n = 23). The age at diagnosis of hearing loss, age at the beginning of auditory habilitation, the age at CI, and the postimplant speech perception abilities were compared between the two groups. Children in the congenital hearing loss group were confirmed to have hearing loss at a mean age of 0.3 years, and those in the delayed-onset hearing loss group were diagnosed with hearing loss at a mean age of 2.0 years. Auditory habilitation began at a mean age of 0.4 and 2.0 years, and CI was performed at a mean age of 1.4 and 2.6 years, respectively. Children in the congenital hearing loss group had better scores on speech perception tests than those in the delayed-onset hearing loss group, but the differences were not significant. About half of the children with delayed-onset hearing loss (57 %) had risk factors associated with delayed-onset hearing loss. A high prevalence of delayed-onset hearing loss was noted in the group of children who underwent CI. Risk factors for hearing loss were not found in 43 % of children with delayed-onset hearing loss. Universal screening for delayed-onset hearing loss needs to be performed during early childhood.

The validity of family history as a risk factor in pediatric hearing loss

OBJECTIVES

A family history of permanent childhood hearing loss is considered a risk factor for pediatric hearing loss, although its validity has been sparsely examined. This study aimed to: (1) investigate the prevalence and yield of this risk factor for congenital and postnatal hearing losses, (2) define the audiometric characteristics of hearing loss in children with positive family histories, and (3) assess the nature of the familial relationships.

METHOD

A retrospective cohort study including all children born in Queensland, Australia between September 2004 and December 2011 who had completed Healthy Hearing's newborn hearing screen (n=380,895).

RESULTS

(1) Prevalence of the risk factor was 1.09% (4138/380,895). Prevalence of the risk factor in congenital cases was 7.29% and in postnatal cases was 36.84%. A low yield was identified for both congenital and postnatal groups (1.43% and 1.7%, respectively). (2) The degree of loss in congenital cases was highly varied, whereas the predominant degree in postnatal cases was mild. The most frequent type of loss for congenital cases was sensorineural, whereas for postnatal cases it was conductive. (3) Maternal or sibling relationships were most commonly reported for congenital losses, and maternal or paternal relationships for postnatal losses.

CONCLUSIONS

Children with a family history of pediatric hearing loss should have their hearing screened at birth and be monitored throughout early childhood. However, more efficient surveillance methods should be considered in view of the high prevalence with low yield.

Effects of policy changes to universal newborn hearing screening follow-up in a university clinic

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of policy changes on loss to follow-up rates and the ability to achieve the goals of the American Academy of Pediatrics Joint Committee on Infant Hearing Screening (2007) for diagnosis of hearing loss by 3 months, amplification within 1 month of diagnosis, and start of intervention by 6 months.

METHOD

From the files of 111 infants, data were extracted on the following: date of birth, birth hospital, hometown, parents' ages, ethnicity, nursery status, medical history, age at initial evaluation and diagnosis, results of evaluation(s), and age at hearing aid fitting and start of early intervention. Data were compared with previously published data from the clinic (Krishnan, 2009).

RESULTS

Policy changes led to a decrease in loss to follow-up and a younger age at diagnosis of hearing loss. Infants identified with hearing loss were fit with amplification at younger ages but not within 1 month of diagnosis of hearing loss. Policy changes had positive outcomes on loss to follow-up and age of diagnosis and amplification.

CONCLUSIONS

Challenges remain in meeting the goals of amplification within 1 month of diagnosis and documenting the start of early intervention. Improved communication between and education of all parties involved in the care of infants is needed.

Early identification of young children with hearing loss in federally qualified health centers

OBJECTIVE

While newborn hearing screening has improved outcomes for children diagnosed with hearing loss, the screening protocol is incomplete in the critical early developmental years, particularly among underserved populations. To address this gap, 7 federally qualified health centers (FQHCs) implemented a periodic, objective infant-toddler hearing screening program during well-child visits. The study aimed to determine the ability of these primary care providers to implement the hearing screening protocol and to identify children in need of audiologic follow-up.

METHOD

This study represents a prospective chart review. Children aged 0 to 3 years presenting to participating clinics for well-child care visits were offered the hearing screen, which included a brief risk factor questionnaire, otoacoustic emissions (OAEs), and tympanometry. Main outcome measures were time to screen, accuracy of physician interpretation of the tympanogram results, and screening results requiring immediate audiology follow-up.

RESULTS

Among 1965 OAE screens, 75% took <10 minutes, and 205 patients (10%) failed OAEs in at least 1 ear; based on tympanometry, middle ear effusions were present in 102 of these cases (50%), while 45 cases (22%) raised concerns for sensorineural hearing loss. Physicians accurately interpreted tympanogram results in 89% of cases. There were 5 patients identified with confirmed permanent sensorineural hearing loss.

CONCLUSION

Findings demonstrate that infant-toddler hearing screening in FQHCs is feasible to conduct, and it may effectively identify cases of postnatal hearing loss. This is one of the first studies in a primary care setting using OAE technology coupled with tympanometry, allowing physicians to better triage patients for immediate audiology referral.

The performance of distortion product otoacoustic emissions and automated auditory brainstem response in the same ear of the babies in neonatal unit

OBJECTIVE

To identify the outcomes of hearing screening using different protocols of both Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions (DPOAE) and Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR) tests in the same ear of the babies in a neonatal unit population.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out on babies who were admitted into a neonatal unit. By using a formula of single proportion and considering 20% drop out, the number of sample required was 114. The subjects were chosen by using a systematic random sampling. The infants selected were subjected to DPOAE followed by AABR tests screening at the same setting before discharge.

RESULTS

There were 73 newborns (61.6% male and 38.4% female) participated in this study with a total of 146 ears screened. Ototoxic medication was the most common risk factor followed by hyperbilirubinaemia and low birth weight. AABR had higher passing rate (82.9%) as compared to DPOAE (77.4%). The highest passing rate was achieved if the protocol of either passed DPOAE or AABR was used (90.4%). The rate was lower when auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder (ANSD) has been considered (82.9%). Hyperbilirubinaemia, prematurity, craniofacial malformation and ototoxic drugs seem to be the high risk factors for auditory neuropathy.

CONCLUSION

AABR has a higher passing rate as compared to DPOAE. However, the use of both instruments in the screening process especially in NICU will be useful to determine the infants with ANSD who may need different approach to management. Therefore, a protocol in which newborns are tested with AABR first and then followed by DPOAE on those who fail the AABR is recommended.

Anxiety of the mothers with referred baby during Universal Newborn Hearing Screening

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the anxiety among mothers whom their babies have failed test results in the first stage of Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Program.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A cross-sectional study was carried out on mothers whom their baby have positive test results in the first stage of Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Program. Face to face interview was conducted to obtain data on sociodemographic profiles, knowledge about hearing loss and past medical history. Symptoms experienced by the mothers due to positive hearing test results and level of anxiety were measured by using the Malay translation Beck Anxiety Inventory questionnaire. These mothers were then given an appointment to come for the second screening six weeks after the first screening. The same questionnaire was given to them before the start of the second screening. SPSS version 11.5 was used for data entry and analysis. Wilcoxon signed Rank Test was used to compare the level of anxiety between the first and second screening.

RESULTS

From a total of 78 mothers who were participated during the first screening, 50 of them have completed the study at the second screening (response rate=64%). Fifty-two percent of them knew about the hearing screening before hand. Ninety-six percent of the mothers became alert about their child response towards sounds after they knew that their child had failed the first hearing screening. During the first screening, 74% of the mothers felt mild anxiety which was decreased to 68% before the mothers undergone the second screening. Moderate anxiety was felt by 10% of the mothers during both the first and second screening. There were 8% of the mothers having severe anxiety during the first screening but have reduced to half (4%) before the mothers undergone the second screening. The anxiety level was significantly less before the second screening with the median score of 5 (IQR: 13.0) compared to after the first screening (8, IQR=14.25); p=0.001.

CONCLUSIONS

There are considerable portion of the mothers of false-positive test result during Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Program experienced unacceptable anxiety. This group of mothers needs to be identified and given a necessary help.

Outcome of a newborn hearing screening program in a tertiary hospital in Malaysia: the first five years

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

Universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) was started in the Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia (HUSM) in January 2003. To comply with international standards, we determined the outcome of the newborn hearing screening program for the first 5 years of its implementation, from January 2003 to December 2007.

METHODS

The program screened all infants who were delivered in HUSM. In a retrospective review, the outcomes in terms of coverage, prevalence of hearing impairment, referral rate for each screening, age at detection of hearing impairment and at hearing aid-fitting were analyzed.

RESULTS

Ninety-eight percent of newborns were screened. The study included 16,100 randomly selected newborns. The initial screening referral rate was 25.5%. The prevalence of default for second and third screening was 33.9% and 40.7%, respectively. The mean (SD) age at detection of hearing impairment was 3.3 months (0.86). The mean (SD) age at fitting of a hearing aid was 13.6 (4.8) months.The prevalence of hearing impairment was 0.09%.

CONCLUSION

A newborn hearing screening program is an important tool for early diagnosis and treatment. Even though the prevalence of hearing impairment may be low, the problem needs to be addressed early as the development of infants requires normal hearing.

Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Follow-Up: A University Clinic Perspective

Purpose

To evaluate the referral and follow-up procedures at a university clinic to determine whether the early intervention program is achieving the goals of diagnosis of hearing loss by 3 months, amplification within 1 month of diagnosis, and intervention services by 6 months, as outlined in the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH; 2007) position statement.

Method

Files for 142 infants were examined, and the following data were collected from each file: date of birth, birth hospital, hometown, parents' ages, ethnicity, nursery status (well baby or neonatal intensive care unit), medical history, age at initial evaluation and at diagnosis, results of evaluation(s), and age at hearing aid fitting and start of early intervention services.

Results

Results revealed that 17% of infants were older than 3 months at the initial evaluation, and 18% of infants who needed further evaluation were lost to follow-up. None of the infants identified with hearing loss received amplification within 1 month of diagnosis or early intervention services by the age of 6 months.

Conclusions

The findings provide further evidence of the challenges of early intervention programs as stated by the JCIH (2007), and they emphasize the importance of communication between practitioners and implementation of monitoring systems and checks and balances to improve the efficacy of early intervention programs.

Hearing assessment in infants and children: recommendations beyond neonatal screening

Congenital or acquired hearing loss in infants and children has been linked with lifelong deficits in speech and language acquisition, poor academic performance, personal-social maladjustments, and emotional difficulties. Identification of hearing loss through neonatal hearing screening, regular surveillance of developmental milestones, auditory skills, parental concerns, and middle-ear status and objective hearing screening of all infants and children at critical developmental stages can prevent or reduce many of these adverse consequences. This report promotes a proactive, consistent, and explicit process for the early identification of children with hearing loss in the medical home. An algorithm of the recommended approach has been developed to assist in the detection and documentation of, and intervention for, hearing loss.

Otoacoustic emissions: a valid, efficient first-line hearing screen for preschool children

BACKGROUND

Normal hearing during the preschool years is essential for speech, language, social, emotional, and preacademic development. Children of low socioeconomic status may be particularly vulnerable to the negative effects of late identification and intervention. While a mass-screening effort focused on preschool children does not have broad support, focused screening remains important to identify children at risk. This project was conducted to address 3 primary aims: develop and implement an initial hearing screen using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) for at-risk preschoolers, verify speed and tolerability of the screen, and assess the test performance of TEOAEs screening compared to pure tone audiometry in a group of 142 preschool children.

METHODS

A total of 744 preschool children attending preschools in an underserved, urban community completed TEOAEs screening by a school nurse. A secondary cohort of 142 children was screened first by TEOAEs and then followed by pure tone audiometry and results compared.

RESULTS

A total of 680 children passed screening. Forty-one children (5.5%) had a "refer" result. Two-year-olds had the highest refusal rate (10.5%). Mean testing time was 43 seconds per ear. Secondary cohort analysis revealed 1 subject did not pass either TEOAEs or pure tone screening; no subject passed TEOAEs and then did not pass pure tone audiometry. TEOAEs screening test sensitivity was 1.00 (95% confidence interval 0.054-1.00) and specificity 0.94 (0.88-0.97).

CONCLUSIONS

TEOAEs screening performed by school nurses is a fast, efficient, and feasible model. Children who pass TEOAEs screening have a very high likelihood of being free from hearing impairment. Application may be particularly relevant in underserved communities.

Neonatal screening for hearing loss: pilot study from a tertiary care centre

Many developed countries have well established universal neonatal hearing screening programs. In India, the viability of such a program, in an already overburdened health system is indeed a challenge. This cross sectional study was undertaken to evaluate the possible burden of hearing loss among neonates born at a tertiary care hospital in Southern India. Five hundred neonates were screened with automated distortion product otoacoustic emission (aDPOAE) for hearing loss, 9.2% of whom had one or more high risk factors. Although 6.4% had hearing loss at initial assessment, only 1.6% had hearing loss on retesting with aDPOAE. Retesting with OAE before an automated Auditory brainstem response (aABR) helped to exclude patients without hearing loss. The frequency of moderate to moderately severe hearing loss in this study was 0.6%. This pilot study underscores the importance of the introduction of screening for congenital deafness in specialized centers in India, despite its challenges.

Hearing Impairment in the Neonate of Preeclamptic Women

Objective

Preeclampsia is a critical condition that puts both pregnant women and their offspring at risk for multiorgan failure, including inner ear, due to systemic toxemia and vascular events. This study was done to determine the probable prevalence of hearing impairment in children whose mothers had pregnancy-induced hypertension, compared to those born to healthy mothers.

Methods and Materials

A cohort study was performed on two groups; the first group was made up of the offspring of preeclamptic women (n = 36) and the second was made up of offspring born to healthy mothers (n = 114). They were matched for sex and age. Other confounding variables that could have influenced the hearing were excluded. Transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and auditory brain response (ABR) tests were performed to screen hearing loss in each group.

Results

Failure rates in the first step for cases and controls were 33.33 percent and 12.76%, respectively, which showed a significant difference statistically ( P = 0.001). However, the final results of the second TEOAE and ABR between the two groups were not statistically significant ( P > 0.05).

Conclusion

Although it does not seem that pregnancy toxemia plays a role in permanent hearing loss in neonates of affected mothers, it might have a transient effect on hearing.

Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in hearing screening programs: protocol for developing countries

OBJECTIVES

To formulate a protocol for infant hearing screening in developing countries enabling it to be later incorporated into their national deafness screening programs. The screening tool should be sensitive in detecting hearing loss in infants with high specificity.

METHODS

2659 infants in the age range of 0-3 months who reported to the Department of Otolaryngology were included in the study. As 537 children were lost to follow up after the first screening, the remaining 2122 infants only were considered for the statistical analysis. These were divided into 3 groups with age range between 0-1, 1-2 and 2-3 months of age. All were subjected to transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) for hearing screening. Those who failed first screening were followed up after 1-month. Pass rate for TEOAE was calculated for each. Infants who had failed the second screening underwent Brainstem Evoked Response Audiometry (BERA). The data collected was statistically analyzed.

RESULTS

77.5% of infants in 0-1-month age group passed the screening test whereas 83.4% and 92.8% of infants passed the screening test in 1-2 months and 2-3 month age groups, respectively. On the first follow up, the pass percentage of the infants who had failed screening earlier rose significantly high up to age of 3 months. Those who had failed the follow up were scheduled for Brainstem Evoked Auditory testing.

CONCLUSION

The concept of this delayed hearing screening at 3 months of age would considerably decrease the number of false positive cases undergoing unnecessary investigations and wastage of resources making the universal neonatal hearing screening within 48 h of life impractical for developing countries. Combining this delayed hearing screening with the 3rd dose of universal immunization program would constitute a viable, feasible and universal hearing screening program, which can be drafted into national deafness programs of the developing countries.

Screening for gap junction protein beta-2 gene mutations in Malays with autosomal recessive, non-syndromic hearing loss, using denaturing high performance liquid chromatography

OBJECTIVE

To determine the frequency and type of gap junction protein beta-2 gene mutations in Malay patients with autosomal recessive, non-syndromic hearing loss.

METHODS

A total of 33 Malay patients with autosomal recessive, non-syndromic hearing loss were screened for mutations in the Cx26 coding region. Deoxyribonucleic acid was extracted from buccal swab samples and subjected to polymerase chain reaction. Slow-reannealing was performed, followed by screening using denaturing high performance liquid chromatography.

RESULTS

Eight of the samples (24.2 per cent) showed heterozygous peaks, and further sequencing of these samples revealed four patients (50.0 per cent) with the W24X mutation, two (25.0 per cent) with the V37I mutation and another two (25.0 per cent) with the G4D mutation.

CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of buccal swab samples by denaturing high performance liquid chromatography is noninvasive and suitable for rapid and reliable screening of gap junction protein beta-2 gene mutations in patients with autosomal recessive, non-syndromic hearing loss. Malay patients with autosomal recessive, non-syndromic hearing loss have different kinds of gap junction protein beta-2 gene mutations which are rarely found in other populations.

Ligurian experience on neonatal hearing screening: clinical and epidemiological aspects

AIM

Early identification and rehabilitation of newborns with congenital hearing impairment (HI) by Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening (UNHS).

METHODS

The neonatal population was divided into two groups: babies with No Audiological Risk (NAR), and babies With Audiological Risk (WAR). NAR neonates underwent OAE testing, and in case of a doubtful (Refer) result, ABR testing was carried out. All WAR newborns underwent ABR testing within the third month of life.

RESULTS

Between February 1, 2002 and December 31, 2004, UNHS was carried out on 32 502 newborns at the 13 regional birth centres, representing 98.7% of the whole regional neonatal population. The prevalence of HI in the population we tested was estimated at about 1 per thousand, while Bilateral Hearing Impairment (BHI) was estimated at 0.65 per thousand. A 3.7% prevalence of HI and a 2.8% prevalence of BHI was observed among the WAR population. Median age at the end of the diagnostic procedures was 6.7 months in the WAR population and 6.9 months in the NAR population.

CONCLUSIONS

Our project is based on two levels of testing, which resulted in a 0.28% false-positive rate with 100% sensitivity and 99% specificity. Our screening is the first Italian experience that has been extended to a whole region and the results prove that regional neonatal hearing screening is feasible.

Hearing screening practices among a national sample of primary care pediatricians

The objective of this study was to describe variations in hearing screening using a survey mailed to a national sample of primary care pediatricians prior to the 2003 American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) hearing screening guidelines. Of the 390 primary care respondents, only 303 (78%) performed audiometry, routinely beginning at age 3 (32%), 4 (44%), or 5 (17%); 81% defined abnormal audiometry primarily as failure to hear at a specified decibel level: 15 dB hearing level (HL) (<1%), 16 to 20 dB HL (10%), 21 to 25 dB HL (23%), 26 to 30 dB HL (44%), 31 to 40 dB HL (16%), and more than 40 dB HL (6%). This study serves as a baseline for comparison with postguideline practices.

Neonatal hearing screening with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in Western Saudi Arabia

OBJECTIVE

To study the incidence of congenital hearing impairment in the Saudi population and to evaluate the need of establishing a Saudi universal neonatal hearing screening program based on transient evoked otoacoustic emission.

METHODS

A total of 11986 well non-high-risk neonates were screened by transient evoked otoacoustic emission over period of 8 years from September 1996 to February 2004. The universal hearing screening was consequently done in a daily base before discharge from nursery. Those who failed the initial screening were followed up diagnostically until hearing loss was confirmed or excluded.

RESULTS

From the total number of 11,986 neonates (41.4% male and 58.6% females) examined in this study 10943 (91.3%) neonates passed the first screening step while 1043(8.7%) neonates failed. From the 1043 neonates examined in the second screening step in the 5th day of life, 300 (29%) neonates failed. At the age of 5 months, all the 300 infants that failed the second screening step underwent a comprehensive audiological assessment to confirm the existence of hearing loss. The 278 infants that passed the assessment were considered as normal; while 22 failed and were confirmed to have congenital hearing loss. Of these 22 infants, 2 had unilateral sensorineural hearing loss, and the remaining 20 had bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. The incidence of sensorineural hearing loss was estimated to be 0.18% while the incidence of bilateral sensorineural hearing loss was 0.17%. No significant difference between males and females was found. The average age at confirmation of congenital hearing loss was 5.5 months.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of congenital hearing loss in the western region of Saudi Arabia is relatively high compared with international figures. Hearing screening for all neonates using transient evoked otoacoustic emission should be part of the standard medical care in Saudi Arabia.

Auditory steady-state responses in infants with perinatal brain injury

Infants with perinatal brain injury present impairments in motor, visual, auditory, and cognitive functions. The most useful methods for detecting auditory alterations are auditory brainstem responses and otoacoustic emissions. Auditory steady-state responses have been reported as a reliable and objective technique for evaluating the hearing threshold. Auditory brainstem responses and auditory steady-state responses were carried out in 53 infants with perinatal brain injury and abnormal neurologic findings. With auditory brainstem responses, 33 (62.26%) infants presented normal and 20 abnormal results; 8 (15.09%) exhibited mild alterations, 8 (15.09%) moderate, and 4 (7.54%) severe alterations. With auditory steady-state responses, 17 (32.0%) infants were normal and 36 (67.9%) had abnormal results. When auditory steady-state responses were compared with auditory brainstem responses gold standard, the assessment gave 100% sensitivity, 51.51% specificity, 55.55% positive predictive value, and 100% negative predictive value. Abnormalities were mild in 21 (39.6%) infants, moderate in 10 (18.9%), and 5 (9.4%) exhibited severe hearing loss. We conclude that hearing loss is a frequent abnormality in infants with perinatal brain injury, and auditory steady-state responses have a high sensitivity for detecting hearing impairment, which is more evident in mild hearing loss for specific frequencies.

Hearing assessment in infants and children: recommendations beyond neonatal screening

Congenital or acquired hearing loss in infants and children has been linked with lifelong deficits in speech and language acquisition, poor academic performance, personal-social maladjustments, and emotional difficulties. Identification of hearing loss through neonatal hearing screening as well as objective hearing screening of all infants and children can prevent or reduce many of these adverse consequences. This report outlines the risk indicators for hearing loss, provides guidance for when and how to assess hearing loss, and addresses hearing referral resources for children of all ages.

A wider role for congenital cytomegalovirus infection in sensorineural hearing loss

BACKGROUND

Diagnostic problems in identifying congenital infection cases in infancy have thus far impaired the assessment of the role of congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection in the etiology of sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the impact of congenital infection in children with SNHL by detection of CMV DNA in stored samples of neonatal dried blood (dried blood spots test).

METHODS

The Guthrie cards of 130 children with hearing loss >40 dB hearing loss were retrieved from the regional screening center. CMV DNA was extracted by thermal shock and amplified by PCR.

RESULTS

The percentage of SNHL cases attributable to congenital CMV infection was 10% (9 of 87) in infants whose SNHL had been diagnosed in their first 2 months of life and 34.2% (13 of 38) in children with deafness of unidentified cause that was diagnosed in early childhood. In the latter group 42.7% (12 of 28) of the children with a hearing loss of >70 dB were CMV-positive.

CONCLUSIONS

The results suggest that congenital CMV infection has a more relevant role in the etiology of SNHL than previously reported. The data obtained in both groups suggest that 20 to 30% of all deafness cases are caused by CMV. The percent of congenital CMV cases alone appears to account for all the cases previously attributed to all congenital infections. More than 40% of deafness cases with an unknown cause, needing rehabilitation, are caused by congenital CMV.

Detección precoz de sorderas. ejemplo de intervención en salud pública

INTRODUCTION

We present a statistic study comparing all the options we can take to face congenital deafness as a problem of public health.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

We collected and analyzed data obtained between 1991 and 1995, just before our universal screening program started. They were separated into two groups with the 144 children explored using ABR, and the results were compared depending on the option taken in each group (no screening or high risk screening) and finally with those obtained in a universal program.

RESULTS

The establishment of a high risk screening program was followed by a drastic reduction of the severe deafness diagnosis (29.5% to 8%), and also of the mean age of diagnosis (24 to 14 months), which were found statistically significant. The mean age with universal screening is 3 months.

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

Early detection of congenital hearing impairment has brought an important advance in the management of this problem of public health minimizing its sequels as the diagnosis is reached earlier. The universal screening of deafness is feasible as based on cheap and easy diagnostic techniques available in any centre, and it must be performed with the rest of Health Children Programs.

The expanding role of the otolaryngologist in managing infants and children with hearing loss

Universal newborn hearing screening will increase the number of very young children requiring care from an otolaryngologist. Although the otolaryngologist is the perceived expert in managing hearing loss, he or she must collaborate with a team of specialists to provide comprehensive treatment for the newly diagnosed child and its family. Working within a team that includes a pediatrician, audiologist, otolaryngologist, speech pathologist, teachers, and care coordinators allows each professional to contribute significantly to the well-being of the child and parents. Group cooperation and parental support can increase the chances of normal speech and language development in an infant with hearing loss. By identifying related or syndromal associations, the otolaryngologist can prevent complications related to other organ systems such as the heart and eyes. Most importantly, parents and patients look up to the validation of the care plan by the ear physician.

Neonatal screening for hearing impairment

Over the last 25 years, technological developments have facilitated the implementation of neonatal screens for hearing impairment. Restricting tests to 10% of the cohort with risk factors enables detection of around 40% of congenital impairments. Critical review has therefore recommended universal screening targeting for identification all neonates with moderate or worse impairment. Both oto-acoustic emission and auditory brainstem response (ABR) recording make this possible. The emission test is very sensitive to mild impairments. Specificity critically depends upon the age of maternity testing, but a false positive rate of 8% at discharge is typical. This is reduced to <1% by implementing a second outpatient test, or an ABR before discharge. Both tests are required to identify auditory neuropathies. Widespread implementation will follow pilot trials that are currently being undertaken. The accurate assessment of screen positives, and appropriate habilitation for those identified, is also required. These needs are complex, and require further study if universal screening is to become routine.

Identification of neonatal hearing impairment: infants with hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

This article describes the audiologic findings and medical status of infants who were found to have hearing loss, detected as part of the Identification of Neonatal Hearing Impairment (INHI) project. In addition, the neonatal and maternal health variables for the group of infants who could not be tested with visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) due to developmental and visual disability are presented.

DESIGN

The overall goal of the INHI project was to evaluate the test performance of auditory brain stem response and evoked otoacoustic emission (OAE) tests given in the newborn period. These tools were evaluated on the basis of the infants' hearing when tested behaviorally with VRA at 8 to 12 mo corrected age. The neonatal test results, VRA results, medical history information and a record of intercurrent events occurring between the neonatal period and the time of VRA were collated and reviewed. The purpose of this article is to review the characteristics of those infants who were found to have hearing loss.

RESULTS

Of 2995 infants who had VRA tests judged to be of good or fair reliability, 168 had a finding of hearing loss for at least one ear, an incidence of 5.6%. Sixty-six infants had bilateral losses, an incidence of 2%, and 22 infants had bilateral hearing losses in the moderate to profound range, an incidence 0.7%. The prevalence of middle ear problems was greater than 50% among these infants with hearing loss. From the larger group of 168 infants with hearing loss, a group of 56 infants (86 ears) was chosen as those with a low probability that the hearing loss was due to transient middle ear pathology and was more likely hearing loss of a permanent nature. These were the infants used for the analyses of neonatal test performance (Norton et al., 2000). In this selected group there were 30 infants with bilateral impairment of at least mild degree, which is an incidence of 1%. There were approximately equal numbers of ears in the mild, moderate, severe and profound range of hearing loss. Risk factors associated with hearing loss were reviewed for the total sample of infants tested with VRA and for those infants with hearing loss. A history of treatment with aminoglycosides was the risk factor most often reported in the entire sample; however, there was no difference in prevalence of this risk factor for the normal-hearing and hearing-impaired groups. The risk factor associated with the highest incidence of hearing loss was stigmata of syndromes associated with sensorineural hearing loss and other neurosensory disorders. Sixty-seven infants who returned for follow-up could not be tested with VRA due to severe developmental delay or visual disability. Many of these infants had medical histories indicating the sequelae of extreme prematurity and/or very low birthweight.

CONCLUSIONS

Most of the hearing losses found in this study were mild and, based on clinical history and tympanometry tests, many of the mild and some of the moderate impairments may have been acquired in early infancy due to middle ear effusion. In the group of infants used for determination of neonatal test performance there were approximately equal numbers of mild, moderate, severe and profound losses. Only a small percentage of infants with a conventional risk indicator for hearing loss actually had a hearing loss, and there were a significant number of infants with hearing loss who did not have a risk indicator. These findings support the need for an early identification program based on universal neonatal hearing screening rather than by targeted testing of those with risk indicators.

The need for universal neonatal hearing screening--some aspects of epidemiology and identification

The devastating consequences of a congenital/early-acquired hearing disability on the speech language and social development of a child and the estimated prevalence rates of at least 1-1.5/1000 live births of congenital permanent hearing impairment are important health problems. Universal neonatal hearing screening programs have provided the opportunity to detect neonates with permanent congenital hearing loss, and thus initiate auditory rehabilitation before the age of 3 mo. Universal neonatal hearing screening represents secondary prevention of hearing impairment/deafness, and the world-wide documented delayed identification of children with congenital/early-acquired hearing impairment will no doubt be improved with the implementation of universal neonatal hearing screening programs.

Neonatal screening for hearing disorders in infants at risk: incidence, risk factors, and follow-up

OBJECTIVE

To determine the incidence and risk factors for hearing disorders in a selected group of neonates and the feasibility of selective hearing screening.

SETTINGS

Multicenter prospective trial at five centers in Germany.

METHODS

Enrollment criteria: in addition to previously defined risk factors by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (family history of hearing loss, in utero infections, craniofacial anomalies, birth weight <1500 g, critical hyperbilirubinemia, ototoxic medications, bacterial meningitis, postnatal asphyxia, mechanical ventilation >5 days, stigmata, or syndromes associated with hearing loss), the impact of maternal drug abuse, birth weight <10th percentile, persistent pulmonary hypertension, and intracranial hemorrhage more than or equal to grade III or periventricular leukomalacia on infant hearing were evaluated. The screening procedure was performed by automated auditory brainstem response (A-ABR; ALGO 1-plus; Natus Med Inc, San Carlos, CA).

STATISTICS

univariate analyses of risk factors versus A-ABR results and a multivariate regression analysis were used; additionally, the total test time was recorded.

RESULTS

Seven hundred seventy recordings from 777 infants enrolled consecutively constitute the basis of this analysis. Mean gestational age was 33.8 +/- 4.3 weeks, birth weight 2141 +/- 968 g; 431 infants being male and 339 female; 41 (5.3%) infants exhibited pathologic A-ABR results (16 bilateral and 25 unilateral). Meningitis or sepsis, craniofacial malformations, and familial hearing loss were independent significant risk factors. Median total test time was 25 minutes. Follow-up examinations in 31 infants revealed persistent hearing loss in 18 infants (13 infants sensorineural, 5 from mixed disorders), 7 requiring amplification.

CONCLUSION

Hearing screening in high-risk neonates revealed a total of 5% of infants with pathologic A-ABR (bilateral 2%). Significant risk factors were familial hearing loss, bacterial infections, and craniofacial abnormalities. Other perinatal complications did not significantly influence screening results indicating improved perinatal handling in a neonatal population at risk for hearing disorders.

Newborn and infant hearing loss: detection and intervention.American Academy of Pediatrics. Task Force on Newborn and Infant Hearing, 1998- 1999

This statement endorses the implementation of universal newborn hearing screening. In addition, the statement reviews the primary objectives, important components, and recommended screening parameters that characterize an effective universal newborn hearing screening program.

Hearing screening in at-risk neonate cohort

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study reports on the prevalence of hearing impairment in an at-risk neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) population.

DESIGN

From 1990 to 1997, 942 neonates were screened with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and brainstem evoked response audiometry (BERA).

RESULTS

835 Infants passed the primary screen for both ears, 57 for one ear, adding up to 94.7%. Seventeen infants (1.9%) were lost to follow-up. In thirteen infants (1.4%), bilateral hearing impairment above 30 dB was confirmed. While all children with hearing impairment belonged to the group of 820 children receiving aminoglycosides, only one presented no other risk factors. In 11 of the hearing impaired children other anamnestic factors, i.e. dysmorphism, prenatal rubella or cytomegaly, family history of hearing loss or severe peri- and postnatal complications seem to be more probable causes of the identified hearing loss.

CONCLUSIONS

From our data, aminoglycosides seem not to be an important risk factor for communication related hearing impairment, when serum levels are continuously monitored, as occurred in our cohort. After adjustment for other risk factors, birth weight between 1000 and 1500 g and a gestational age between 29 and 31 weeks were no predictive markers for hearing impairment. It might be speculated that the improved medical treatment in a Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) reduces the probability of hearing impairment for those two groups. Conductive hearing loss as a possible additional cause for hearing impairment was not studied in detail, but the high percentage of malformations detected (four out of 13 hearing impaired infants) demands further monitoring, close follow-up, counselling and adequate treatment.

Language of early- and later-identified children with hearing loss

OBJECTIVE

To compare the language abilities of earlier- and later-identified deaf and hard-of-hearing children.

METHOD

We compared the receptive and expressive language abilities of 72 deaf or hard-of-hearing children whose hearing losses were identified by 6 months of age with 78 children whose hearing losses were identified after the age of 6 months. All of the children received early intervention services within an average of 2 months after identification. The participants' receptive and expressive language abilities were measured using the Minnesota Child Development Inventory.

RESULTS

Children whose hearing losses were identified by 6 months of age demonstrated significantly better language scores than children identified after 6 months of age. For children with normal cognitive abilities, this language advantage was found across all test ages, communication modes, degrees of hearing loss, and socioeconomic strata. It also was independent of gender, minority status, and the presence or absence of additional disabilities.

CONCLUSIONS

Significantly better language development was associated with early identification of hearing loss and early intervention. There was no significant difference between the earlier- and later-identified groups on several variables frequently associated with language ability in deaf and hard-of-hearing children. Thus, the variable on which the two groups differed (age of identification and intervention) must be considered a potential explanation for the language advantage documented in the earlier-identified group.

Field sensitivity of targeted neonatal hearing screening using the Nottingham ABR Screener

OBJECTIVE

A population of children having bilateral moderate to profound hearing impairment was investigated to find out the number who passed (false negatives) and who failed (true positives) a screening test based on the auditory brain stem response (ABR).

DESIGN

This study of the ABR is a parallel report to Lutman, Davis, Fortnum, and Wood (1997), where the transient evoked otoacoustic emission was examined on a similar but not identical population of at-risk neonates. Hearing screening was undertaken in at-risk neonates (targeted screening) at seven hospitals in the UK using the Nottingham ABR Screener. During the period from January 1988 to December 1993, a total of 6983 neonates had been tested. Assessment of audiological records from the participating centers ascertained that 201 children born between January 1988 and December 1993 had hearing threshold levels in both ears of 50 dB or more, averaged over the speech frequencies 0.5, 1, 2, and 4 kHz. Of these, 51 had completed the ABR screening test. Examination of the ABR records, which included both machine and visual scoring, indicated whether they had passed or failed the screening test.

RESULTS

Forty-six of the 51 hearing impaired babies failed the neonatal ABR screen either on one or both ears (five false negatives), and 42 failed the test on both ears (nine false negatives). This resulted in field sensitivities of 90% and 82%, respectively. Two cases of suspected progressive hearing loss have been included in the numbers of false negative results. The percentage of babies passing the screen on both ears and subsequently having normal hearing (specificity) is typically 93%.

CONCLUSIONS

Neonatal hearing screening in an at-risk population using a highly automated ABR test is a viable and effective tool for identification of hearing impairment. Although the field sensitivity of the test is high, it is unable to identify all babies with a criterion level of hearing loss. There are a number of possible explanations as to the origin of false negative results: configuration of the pure-tone audiogram, a progressive hearing loss, acquired sensorineural or conductive loss, retrocochlear deafness, or an incorrect interpretation of the screening test. Passing a neonatal screening test, therefore, does not exclude the possibility of subsequent hearing impairment and highlights the need for further surveillance.

The age of diagnosis of sensorineural hearing impairment in children

OBJECTIVE

To identify factors responsible for delays in diagnosis and treatment of pediatric sensorineural hearing impairment (SNHI), and to assess the thoroughness of medical evaluation in these children.

DESIGN

Retrospective analysis.

SETTING

State-supported school for the deaf.

PATIENTS AND OTHER PARTICIPANTS

291 children with SNHI, the bast majority of whom are profoundly hearing impaired. Data were collected from the school's database, individual student records, and a parental questionnaire.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

(1) The age of diagnosis and treatment of SNHI; (2) actors leading to a delay in diagnosis; (3) current medical evaluations used to determine the etiology of SNHI; and (4) the level of parental satisfaction with the evaluation process.

RESULTS

Many children with SNHI experience delays in diagnosis from the time of first suspicion of hearing loss. Children with a risk factor for SNHI are diagnosed no earlier than children without a risk factor. Caucasian children are diagnosed significantly earlier than either Black or Hispanic children, regardless of socioeconomic status. Inconsistent medical evaluation ensues following the diagnosis of SNHI, and parental satisfaction with this process is low.

CONCLUSIONS

The average age of diagnosis of SNHI remains unacceptably high. There exists a need to enhance physician awareness of childhood deafness and to develop guidelines for the medical evaluation in cases of pediatric SNHI. Lastly, the importance of parental concern regarding a child's hearing or language development must be re-emphasized.

Universal newborn hearing screenings: a three-year experience

OBJECTIVE

To perform hearing screenings on all newborns before hospital discharge, using auditory brainstem evoked responses with analysis of time, cost, and failure rates to evaluate and determine the screening practicality.

METHOD

Over a 3-year period from January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1995, auditory brainstem evoked response screenings were performed on 15 749 infants born at Saint Barnabas Medical Center, Livingston, New Jersey, before their hospital discharge by certified/licensed audiologists. The auditory brainstem evoked response screenings were conducted using the Nicolet Compass Evoked Potential System.

RESULTS

A 3-year experience of testing 15 749 infants proved to be a cost-effective program with costs less than $30.00/baby. To date, 46 babies have been identified with bilateral sensorineural hearing loss and 6 babies with unilateral sensorineural hearing loss.

CONCLUSIONS

The universal newborn hearing screening program at Saint Barnabas Medical Center has proved to be effective, beneficial, and necessary for an institution with more than 5000 births, annually. Early identification of hearing loss has resulted in infants receiving early intervention, and the screening program has provided education and follow-up services to both parents and physicians.

A cost-effectiveness analysis of the high risk register and auditory brainstem response

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate an infant hearing screening program utilizing the high risk register (HRR) and auditory brainstem response (ABR).

DESIGN

A cost-effectiveness analysis of the screening program employing a retrospective cohort identified by chart review. The analysis was performed on a hypothetical cohort of 100,000 births and the results compared with a base model derived from literature review.

SETTING

Mount Sinai Hospital, New York City, an urban, tertiary care institution.

PATIENTS

All infants born between November 1990 and October 1993, approximately 16,500. Cost-effectiveness analysis focused on test results of 420 infants failing the HRR and 381 who subsequently received ABR.

RESULTS

Analysis of the Mount Sinai Hospital (MSH) protocol showed it to be less cost-effective than other similar programs. The cost per hearing loss was far more at MSH than that found elsewhere. Further, the MSH program was ineffective in detecting infants with congenital hearing loss--identifying only one case between 1990 and 1993. Analysis of high risk criteria finds a low incidence of family history of hearing loss in the Mount Sinai cohort while other studies find a very high incidence.

CONCLUSIONS

It appears that the poor performance of the MSH protocol is due to low specificity and sensitivity of the HRR. This generates a costly and ineffective program as follow-up exams focus on ruling-out false-positives rather than correctly identifying true hearing losses. Further evaluation is needed to determine whether changes in the application of the HRR or utilization of newer, low-cost tests such as otoacoustic emissions (OAE) may be effective in universal infant hearing screening.

Outcomes of neonatal screening for hearing loss by otoacoustic emission

AIM

To assess universal neonatal screening for bilateral hearing impairments averaging 40 dBHL or worse in the better ear, using transient evoked otoacoustic emission screening (TEOAE) testing.

METHODS

A three year cohort (14,353 infants born from January 1992 to 1995) was screened and subsequently followed up by hearing surveillance methods, including a distraction test screen from 7 months of age. The entire cohort was used to evaluate the outcome of the screen. A subcohort of 8172 district residents was used to evaluate the continuing worth of the distraction test programme.

RESULTS

Nineteen infants (1.3/1000) with a targeted hearing impairment failed the neonatal TEOAE test. Six profoundly deaf infants identified by the TEOAE screen, were fitted with hearing aids at a median age of 16 weeks. One remained without an aid. Of 12 infants with a moderate impairment, only seven accepted hearing aid fitting and the median age of being fitted with an aid increased to 42 weeks. By the time of the analysis 22 children with a targeted hearing impairment (1.5/1000) had been identified from the cohort. Of the three missed neonatally, one was cared for elsewhere, another had a progressive loss, and the third had central deafness. Twenty children were ascertained with a congenital peripheral deafness. Of these, eight (40%) had risk factors identifiable neonatally. Only the child with central deafness was missed by TEOAE screening and subsequently identified by behavioural tests in infancy. The TEOAE screen outperformed the distraction test in terms of processes and yield and was 25% less expensive.

CONCLUSIONS

The analysis confirmed the worth within the district of the TEOAE hearing screen. It will thus be continued as a universal neonatal screen with the distraction test being retained as a selective screen in the latter half of infancy.

Auditory brainstem response screening for hearing loss in high risk neonates

The present paper reports the findings of a 7 year study evaluating the use of the auditory brainstem response (ABR) as the basis of a hearing screening procedure in a group of newborns at increased risk of hearing impairment. A Special Care Baby Unit (SCBU) population of 417 infants with diverse clinical backgrounds and treatment histories was tested for hearing impairment at birth using ABR audiometry. Some 332 passed the original screen at 30 dBnHL test level in both ears. Of the failure group, 18 did not survive and 32 had some degree of hearing impairment confirmed, nine of which were sensorineural in origin. An increased incidence of persistent middle ear disease was also noted in the failure group. A detailed operational analysis demonstrates that provided appropriate pass/fail criteria are adopted, the ABR technique offers excellent sensitivity and specificity for the detection of significant hearing loss in the test population. Furthermore, the study establishes that implementation of an ABR-based screening programme could reduce the average age at detection of permanent hearing loss by 7 months. A cost assessment shows that the introduction of such a targetted screening procedure could be done at a reasonable outlay.

Neonatal hearing screening

Severe congenital hearing impairment is an important handicap affecting 0.1% of live-born infants and 1%-2% of graduates of Neonatal Intensive Care Units. The prognosis for intellectual, emotional, language and speech development in the hearing-impaired child is improved when the diagnosis is made early and intervention is begun before the age of 6 months. The usual age at diagnosis of hearing impairment is at least 18-30 months (or even later in cases of less severe hearing impairment) where there are no screening programmes. When screening is carried out using distraction methods at the age of approximately 9 months some hearing-impaired infants are missed and those discovered are at least 15-18 months before intervention begins. Neonatal screening could give hearing-impaired children the best chances for optimal care and development. Universal neonatal hearing screening is necessary, because, when neonatal hearing screening is restricted to high risk groups 30%-50% of infants with hearing loss are not discovered. The methods available for neonatal hearing screening are discussed in this paper.

CONCLUSION

In our view automated measurement of auditory brainstem responses is the most valuable method for universal neonatal hearing screening.