1982
Hearing Loss in Low-Birth-Weight Infants
Abstract: Aim To evaluate the hearing loss and associated risk factors in low-birth weight infants in our institution.Materials and Methods This study was conducted in 100 infants who were admitted in our hospital between June 2013 and December 2014. Auditory brainstem-evoked response (ABER) was used to evaluate the hearing threshold with response to audiological clicks-associated risk factors.Results Of the total 100 infants who were taken up for study, 62 infants had hearing loss, and coexisting risk factors were pres…
Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Select...
49
4
3
0
Citation Types
0
20
0
1
Year Published
1985
2025
Publication Types
Select...
46
5
3
Relationship
0
54
Authors
Journals
Cited by 54 publications
(21 citation statements)
References 8 publications
0
20
0
1
“…The prevalence of hearing loss in our NICU population is of interest because, with the exception of the 4.5 per cent rate in 1981 for patients weighing s2000g at birth, the rates were never >2 per cent in this low-birthweight group. This is a much lower prevalence than other centers have reported (Anagnostakis et al 1982, Astbury et al 1983, Bergman et al 1985, Duara et al 1986, Pettigrew et al 1988, Salamy et al 1989). Possible explanations for this discrepancy are our criterion of no respopnse to a 60dBnHL click, rather than simply a long-latency response, and our requirement of confirmation of hearing loss after discharge from the NICU before a patient was classified as having a hearing loss (Stein et al 1983, Shannon et al 1984).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…The prevalence of hearing loss in our NICU population is of interest because, with the exception of the 4.5 per cent rate in 1981 for patients weighing s2000g at birth, the rates were never >2 per cent in this low-birthweight group. This is a much lower prevalence than other centers have reported (Anagnostakis et al 1982, Astbury et al 1983, Bergman et al 1985, Duara et al 1986, Pettigrew et al 1988, Salamy et al 1989). Possible explanations for this discrepancy are our criterion of no respopnse to a 60dBnHL click, rather than simply a long-latency response, and our requirement of confirmation of hearing loss after discharge from the NICU before a patient was classified as having a hearing loss (Stein et al 1983, Shannon et al 1984).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…Clark and Conry (13) showed a relationship between antibiotic history and sensorineural loss in low birthweight infants. In contrast, both Anagnostakis (12) and Simmons ( 1 1) found no effect of certain potentially ototoxic drugs.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 93%
“…However, there is no concensus on the level of bilirubin that is toxic in the sick or premature neonate. Anagnostakis et a1 ( 12) reported hearing loss in association with frequent apneic spells and serum bilirubin levels greater than 14 mg/dl. Other data suggest that sensorineural deafness occurs in approximately 4% of children with severe perinatal asphyxia ( 17).…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…Noise can have ominous effects on the hearing and health of the newborns: moderate exposure to potentially damaging sounds, especially in association with ototoxic drugs, hypoxia, acidosis, jaundice and septicemia [18] may initially cause a temporary threshold shift, but repeated exposure can gradually produce hearing loss [19][20][21]. A period of exposure to intense, short-duration sounds greater than 140 dB such as an explosion, may produce an immediate, severe, permanent hearing loss [19], but in our incubator such levels were never reached. However, we remark that these data were obtained from adults, and the neonatal acoustic system is obviously extremely fragile, and safety threshold is not known.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
