Tympanometry using 226 Hz, 678 Hz, and 1000 Hz probe tones was undertaken on two groups of babies, age 2 to 21 weeks. A group of 104 babies with normal ABR thresholds or TEOAEs were compared with a second group of 107 babies who had evidence of temporary conductive hearing loss based on the findings of a test battery, which included air and bone conduction ABR. The tympanograms were classified by Method 1, a simple visual classification system, and Method 2, adapted from a system described by Marchant et al (1986). The majority of tympanograms recorded in both groups using the 226 Hz probe tone were 'normal' Type A, with no significant difference in middle ear pressure or static admittance. However, both classification methods demonstrated significant differences between the two groups using the higher frequency probe tones, with Method 2 being the preferred system of classification. Tympanometry using 226 Hz is invalid below 21 weeks and 1000 Hz is the frequency of choice.

From a cohort of 10 686 live births, 322 (3%) were identified as being at risk of a hearing impairment defined as moderate, or worse. These neonates were screened by measurement of auditory brainstem responses. The neonatal at risk screening programme was effective in terms of both yield and cost. The mean age at which hearing aids were fitted was 6 months in the children identified by the neonatal screen. Such a programme is both practicable and useful in a district general hospital. The yield from the neonatal programme was, however, only 43% of the total number of deaf children eventualiy identified from the cohort. The need to identify more deaf children by a sensitive infant distraction test screening programme remains.

No abstract

Neonatal hearing screening of all babies within the maternity unit is now feasible using transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) recording. However, in many maternity units in the United Kingdom, the majority of babies are discharged within the first 48 hours. During the first two days of life, there is a higher proportion of babies in whom emissions cannot be recorded. A universal TEOAE hearing screen has been implemented in Whipps Cross Hospital. As 70% of the babies are discharged from the maternity unit before they are 48 hours old, a two stage screen was implemented, with failure at the initial TEOAE test being followed by a retest after 4-6 weeks. The maternal anxiety caused by this model was investigated in 288 mothers enrolled for the initial TEOAE test. Generally, anxiety was low and attitudes towards the screen were positive. Ninety-seven per cent of mothers considered the screen to be worthwhile at the initial test with 15% feeling it had caused some anxiety but less than 1% being very worried. The mothers who had some anxieties were not dissatisfied with the screen, and within this group there was no increase in the proportion of babies who had failed the initial test. At the retest, two of 57 mothers (3.5%) considered they were very worried, but there was no significant deterioration in attitude towards the screen. Spielberger's State-Trait Anxiety Inventory revealed no significant difference in the anxiety state of the retest group when compared with a control group whose babies had not received a neonatal hearing test. The results of the initial test and the retest did not influence the anxiety state of the mothers. Ways of minimizing anxiety caused to a minority of mothers whilst maintaining positive attitudes to the screen are discussed.

Results-A targeted PCHI was found in 1.18/1000 neonates. The PPV of the ABR for confirming a targeted PCHI was 100% when the ABR threshold was > 80 dBnHL. Nine of 11 infants with this threshold had severe or profound permanent deafness. The delay from ABR to audiological certainty was about 1 month-diagnosis was confirmed around 3 months. There was uncertainty when the ABR was 40-80 dBnHL. The PPV was 60% and 8% when the ABR thresholds were 70 dBnHL and 50 dBnHL, respectively. 85 of 111 infants with ABR thresholds in this range had a temporary conductive impairment. Their early diagnosis depended upon the type and degree of hearing impairment and diagnosis was delayed to about 8 months in these infants. Conclusions-Hearing impairments identified by universal screening are delayed in all but those with severe or profound bilateral PCHI. This delay can be reduced by applying in early infancy a battery of audiological tests and requires further exploration. (Arch Dis Child 1999;81:380-389)

The contribution of parental suspicion in the original identification of a 16 year cohort of 171 children with varying degrees of hearing impairment who were screened and identified in childhood was studied. Only a quarter of the children with permanent hearing loss were identified as a result of parental concern. The presence of parental suspicion preceding the audiological diagnosis was also measured. Of the children with severe or profound deafness, the parents only suspected the presence of hearing loss in 44%. Parental suspicion was even lower for those with a mild or moderate permanent hearing loss, and for those with an otherwise symptomless conductive hearing loss caused by otitis media with effusion. Some parents did identify hearing impairment in their children, and parental suspicion should never be professionaily disregarded. Most parents, however, experienced initial difficulty in recognising their children's hearing loss, even when the children were comparatively old. The study confirms the need to continue to identify deafness early by both parental vigilance and sensitive hearing screening programmes.

Even with UNHS in place post-neonatal routes to identification need to be maintained and improvements investigated.

There is a high positive linear correlation between ck-ABR and pure-tone average thresholds at 2 to 4 kHz. However, the predictive value of ABR is reduced in certain neonatal groups. The cause for this is discussed as are the implications for undertaking a test battery at this age to improve the predictive accuracy.