Hearing loss screening tool (COBRA score) for newborns in primary care setting

Parental perceptions to new-born screening for hearing loss in Nigeria: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the perceptions of parents towards universal new-born screening for hearing loss in Nigeria.

METHODS

A systematic review was conducted following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) system. A comprehensive search was undertaken using multiple databases (National Library of Medicine, PubMed, Cochrane Library, Scopus, Google Scholar, and MEDLINE) published in English between 2009 and 2018. The sample size of 10 studies were retrieved by using a predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria, keywords, and Boolean operator search patterns. Data extraction and analysis and quality appraisal of the selected articles was carried out.

RESULTS

80% of the identified studies indicated negative perceptions of Nigerian parents towards new-born hearing loss screening programmes. Possible reasons behind such negative perceptions were categorised into demographic factors, psychological factors, behavioural factors, and service-related factors. Specifically, barriers included low income, misconceptions, mode of delivery, fear of associated risk with screening procedure, preference for traditional medicines, inappropriately designed screening programmes, cost of screening programmes, resource-limited settings, lack of awareness about risk factors and their effects.

CONCLUSION

The research concluded that it is necessary to focus on the range of underlying factors (including awareness and education) contributing in shaping the above mentioned negative perceptions among Nigerian parents. The findings have great implications for the theoretical researchers for developing future research path as well as practical suggestion for authorities in policymaking in the healthcare sector in Nigeria.

Early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) programmes for infants and young children in low-income and middle-income countries in Asia: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) measures initiated in high-income countries (HICs) were attempted in low-income and middle-income countries (L&MICs). However, information regarding the models of EHDI, context-specific adaptations made to strategies and outcomes are not known.

AIMS

The aims of this systematic review were to identify the various models of EHDI used in Asian L&MICs in the published scientific literature and to describe their efficacy and validity.

METHODS

The studies were eligible if the programme was from Asian L&MICs, implemented for children below 6 years of age and published between 2010 and 2021. Google Scholar, PubMed, Web of Science, Scopus, EBSCOHost and EBSCO-CINAHL were used to find articles. Data were extracted from each selected article, and the risk of bias was assessed. The search results were summarised using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses flow diagram. For primary outcomes, narrative synthesis was used, and forest plots were generated for secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

In all, 82 studies were included, and these studies were divided into two categories: newborn and infant screening programmes and screening programmes for older children. Predominantly, a two-stage objective otoacoustic emission (Distortion Product/Transient Evoked) or automated auditory brainstem response screening, followed by a detailed auditory brainstem response to confirm the hearing loss, was used in newborn and infant screening programmes. Audiologists were the most frequent screening personnel. Screening of older children was mostly done by otolaryngologists, school instructors and nurses. They performed a single-stage pure tone audiometry screening followed by a detailed examination.

CONCLUSION

The screening tools and protocols used were similar to those used in HICs. However, no uniform protocols were followed within each country. Long-term viability of EHDI programmes was not known as there was limited information on impact outcomes such as cost-benefit.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42021240341.