UNHS: A Decade Long Feasibility and Sustenance Study from a Tertiary Care Hospital in India

Objective The aim of this study is to estimate the incidence of hearing loss in neonates at a tertiary referral center, to assess the associated risk factors in those identified with hearing loss and to explore the challenges of starting and continuing a universal neonatal hearing screening programme in a tertiary care hospital over a decade. Materials and Methods It is a cohort prospective observational study conducted from January 2008 to January 2018. Five thousand five hundred and forty neonates underwent screening for hearing loss, of which 2688 were well babies and 2854 babies had one or more risk factors causing hearing loss. Otoacoustic emissions (OAE) is employed as the first level of screening within one month of birth. Brainstem evoked response audiometry (BERA) is done at 3 months of gestational age for all the well babies who were referred on OAE testing and all the high risk babies irrespective of the result of the OAE screening. The High risk criteria are based on the set criteria by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (2007) and American Academy of Pediatrics (1994). Results In our study the incidence of hearing impairment is 5.41 per 1000 neonates screened. In well babies and at risk babies it is 1.49 and 9.11 per 1000 respectively.The common neonatal risk factors associated with hearing loss in our study are babies admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICU), intrauterine growth retardation (IUGR), birth weight less than 1500 g, respiratory distress syndrome (RDS) and hyperbilirubinemia. Conclusion The incidence of hearing loss in our study is comparable to that reported in literature (Bachmann KR, ArvedsonJC (1998) Early identification and intervention for children who are hearing impaired. Pediatr Rev. 1998 May; Vol. 19. No.5. pp. 155-165. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9584525 Accessed from May 1998, Nagapoornima P, Ramesh A, Srilakshmi, Rao S, Patricia PL, Gore M, et al. Universal hearing screening. Indian J Pediatr. 2007 Jun 18; 74(6):545-9., Augustine AM, Jana AK, Kuruvilla KA, Danda S, Lepcha A, Ebenezer J, et al. (2014) Neonatal hearing screening-experience from a tertiary care hospital in southern India. Indian Pediatr. Vol. 51. No.3. pp 179-183. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24277966 Accessed from Mar 2014). Hearing loss is more common in those babies with risk factors as reported in literature (Nagapoornima P, Ramesh A, Srilakshmi, Rao S, Patricia PL, Gore M, et al. Universal hearing screening. Indian J Pediatr. 2007 Jun 18; 74(6):545-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21654001 Paul AK (2011) Early identification of hearing loss and centralized newborn hearing screening facility-the Cochin experience. Indian Pediatr. Vol. 48. No. 5. pp 355-359. Accessed from May 2011). Implementation of neonatal hearing screening program at a tertiary care hospital using a two tier system with OAE and BERA is a feasible but challenging service.

Newborn Hearing Screening: Time to Act!

The present study was carried out with the aim of assessing the outcomes of otoacoustic hearing screening in newborns coupled with the three stage protocol. It was a hospital based observational study which was conducted over a time period of twelve months at a tertiary care institute to screen 2000 live neonates for congenital hearing impairment using OAE, followed up by tympanometry and BERA, if required. 2000 neonates were screened for hearing impairment. 406 were in high risk group and the rest in non-high risk group. Seven neonates had absent V wave on BERA. Five of them were high risk babies and the rest two were non-high risk ones. In order to ensure that early detection and effective intervention are possible for all neonates with hearing impairment, UNHS should be performed. Three stage UNHS protocol using OAE and BERA showed that the implementation of UNHS for congenital childhood hearing loss for all neonates would be beneficial.

Newborn hearing screening protocols and their outcomes: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a review of the most current research in objective measures used within newborn hearing screening protocols with the aim of exploring the actual protocols in terms of the types of measures used and their frequency of use within a protocol, as well as their outcomes in terms of sensitivity, specificity, false positives, and false negatives in different countries worldwide.

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis. Electronic databases such as PubMed, Google Scholar and Science Direct were used for the literature search. A total of 422 articles were identified, of which only 15 formed part of the current study. The 15 articles that met the study's criteria were reviewed. Pertinent data and findings from the review were tabulated and qualitatively analysed under the following headings: country; objective screening and/or diagnostic measures; details of screening protocol; results (including false positive and negative findings, sensitivity and/or specificity), conclusion and/or recommendations. These tabulated findings were then discussed with conclusions and recommendations offered.

RESULTS

Findings reported in this paper are based on a qualitative rather than a quantitative analysis of the reviewed data. Generally, findings in this review revealed firstly, that there is a lack of uniformity in protocols adopted within newborn hearing screening. Secondly, many of the screening protocols reviewed consist of two or more tiers or stages, with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) being most commonly used. Thirdly, DPOAEs appear to be less commonly used when compared to TEOAEs. Lastly, a question around routine inclusion of AABR as part of the NHS protocol remains inconclusively answered.

CONCLUSIONS

There is sufficient evidence to suggest that the inclusion of AABR within a NHS programme is effective in achieving better hearing screening outcomes. The use of AABR in combination with OAEs within a test-battery approach or cross-check principle to screening is appropriate, but the inclusion of AABR to facilitate appropriate referral for diagnostic assessment needs to be systematically studied.

Neonatal Screening for Prevalence of Hearing Impairment in Rural Areas

Hearing is one of the most important sense organs for man. Hearing loss is often associated with delayed speech and language development in young children. Early identification and intervention improves the chance a child gets to lesser delays in development and improving the overall quality of life. To find out the prevalence of hearing loss in neonates in the rural taluka of Maval, Pune, Maharashtra, India. Prospective Non Randomized Clinical Study. The study was carried out between April 2012 and April 2015. A total of 8192 babies were screened across various centers around the Maval area. The babies who had some high risk factors were 1683 in number and babies who had no high risk factors i.e. well babies were 6509. In our study, the overall prevalence of hearing loss in neonates in Maval taluka of Maharashtra was found to be 3.54 per 1000 live births, in normal born neonates (well babies) was 1.689 per 1000 births, in high risk babies was 10.69 per 1000 high risk births. The prevalence of low birth weight neonates, hyperbilirubinemia neonates and neonates with craniofacial abnormalities developing hearing impairment was found to be 5.9, 3.56 and 1.18 per 1000 high risk births respectively. India is the second most populated country in the world with nearly a fifth of the world's population. There is a need for the universal neonatal screening for deafness for earlier detection of deafness and rehabilitation. Level of Evidence: Level IV.

Trends, prospects and deprivation index of disability in India: Evidences from census 2001 and 2011

BACKGROUND

Since the dawn of civilization, disabilities have existed in various dimensions of human life. World Health Organization (WHO) defines disability as an umbrella term, covering impairments, activity limitations, and participation restrictions. Globally, approximately 1 billion people have some form of disability, and approximately 20% have significant functioning impairments.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to estimate the level, trends and prospects of disability in 640 districts of India. Data for the present study has been taken from Census of India, 2001 and 2011.

METHODS

A Disability Index was calculated at the district level, and state level indexing was done using the Disability Deprivation Index. The population for the year 2021 was projected using the exponential growth rate method. The Disability Deprivation Index was calculated using child labor, adult unemployment, illiteracy, and the ratio of beggars in the disabled population.

RESULTS

The study reveals that the proportion of the disabled population in India was 2.10% in 2001, which increased to 2.21% in 2011. According to the Disability Deprivation Index, Maharashtra was the best-performing state in 2011. There were 4.90 million new cases of disability in India during 2001-11, out of which 1.52 million cases belonged to non-congenital disability.

CONCLUSIONS

There is a rise in the disabled population in India, which needs special attention. The working status of the disabled is gloomy. The majority of the disabled people are non-working and need adequate rehabilitation measures that would facilitate employment.

Follow-up in newborn hearing screening - A systematic review

INTRODUCTION

The quality and efficiency of newborn hearing screening programs (NHS) rely heavily on appropriate follow-up. The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing recommends a follow-up rate of more than 95% of infants who fail the initial hearing screening. However, a 70% benchmark is considered to be more feasible. This high loss to follow-up (LTF) rate acts as a threat to the overall success of NHS programs. The objective of the study was to identify and examine the reported rates of LTF, attributed reasons for LTF and strategies undertaken to reduce LTF.

METHODS

Using a systematic search, articles published between 2005 to December 2015 were identified from PubMed/Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), Educational Resources Information Center (ERIC), Scopus, Ovid, ProQuest, and Cochrane Library. To be included in the review, the study should be exploring the loss to follow-up or drop-out rate in newborn hearing screening programs and be published in an indexed peer-reviewed journal in the English language. The main outcome measures were overall rate of LTF, factors leading to LTF and measures adopted to overcome LTF.

RESULTS

53 articles were short-listed for data extraction. Out of these, 27 were single-centre studies, 19 were multi-centre, 3 compared multiple databases, and 4 used survey-based methods. Overall LTF rates of 20% in single-centre and 21% in multiple-centre studies were observed. Educational disparity and lack of adequate knowledge among parents were associated with LTF. The most commonly used strategy to overcome LTF suggested by studies was the use of an adequate data management system.

CONCLUSION

This review is a novel attempt to explore the LTF among NHS studies, reasons for LTF and strategies to reduce LTF. This review can act as a basis for planning and execution of effective NHS programs.

Neonatal Hearing Screening Programme (NHSP): At A Rural Based Tertiary Care Centre

Deafness is the most common curable childhood handicap. It is a well recognised fact that unidentified hearing impairment can adversely affect optimal speech and language development and therefore academic, social and emotional development. Universal neonatal hearing screening programmes are implemented in many developed countries. However it is still in its early stage in India. The incidence of hearing impairment in India is 1-6 per thousand newborns screened (Paediatrics 19:155-165, 1998; Indian J Paediatr 74(6):545-549, 2007; Status of Disability in India, pp 172-185 2000). To determine the incidence of permanent hearing loss of moderate to evere variety in neonates taking care in a tertiary care rural based hospital in Gujarat. It was a non randomised observational study done for duration of 3 years. All neonates born in Shri Krishna Hospital underwent screening using two stage protocols with DPOAE test and final confirmation done with BERA. Total 2534 neonates were screened out of them 52 failed and 2482 (97.94 %) neonates passed in the 1st DPOAE test with 2.05 % refer rate. Total 7 (2 per 1000) neonates were detected with hearing impairment. 10 % neonates had one or other high risk factor. Out of high risk neonates, 1.8 % were diagnosed with hearing impairment in high risk group. Overall the follow-up rate was 72.7 %. Hospital based universal hearing screening of new born before discharge is feasible at a rural based tertiary care centre. Non specialist staff is invaluable in achieving a satisfactory referral rate with two stage hearing screening protocol. However, more efficacious tracking and follow up system is needed to improve the follow up rate for diagnosis.

Prevalence and referral rates in neonatal hearing screening program using two step hearing screening protocol in Chennai - A prospective study

OBJECTIVE

To estimate the prevalence and referral rates in well born and high risk babies using two step hearing screening protocol with Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions (DPOAE) and Automated Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR).

METHOD

A prospective study was carried out on 1405 neonates (983 well born babies and 422 high risk babies) who were screened during May 2013 to January 2015 at Institute of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Madras Medical College, Chennai. All neonates were screened using two step screening protocol. They were initially tested with DPOAE. Referred babies in DPOAE were screened with AABR subsequently.

RESULTS

Among 1405 (100%) neonates 983 (69.96%) were well born babies and 422 (30.03%) were high risk babies. Total referral rate in DPOAE was found to be 311 (22.13%) among which 195 (13.87%) were well born babies and 116 (8.25%) were high risk babies. Out of 311 babies 31 (2.20%) babies were referred in AABR screening. In 31 babies referred in AABR 11(0.78%) were from well born group and 20 (1.42%) were from the high risk group. Further diagnostic evaluation of these babies, 2 (0.14%) were confirmed to have hearing loss. This study reveals, the prevalence of congenital hearing loss in our population is 1.42 per 1000 babies.

CONCLUSION

Using two step protocol especially AABR along with DPOAE at the initial level of testing significantly reduces referral rates in new born screening programs. Also AABR decreases the false positive responses hence increasing the efficiency of screening program.