Primary Care Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Related to Newborn Hearing Screening

Moeller, Mary Pat; White, Karl R.; Shisler, Lenore

doi:10.1542/peds.2006-1008

Cited by 94 publications

(123 citation statements)

References 24 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

102

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These are fundamental in a program whose global goal is taking care of hearing [43]. An essential part of this attention is the support given by the primary health care pediatrician [8,29,52]. In the periodic newborn controls, this professional verifies the performance of screening tests, plans follow-up for children with risk factors and evaluates the appropriate diagnostic and therapeutic attention in hearing loss, whether confirmed or still to be confirmed.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs

Benito-Orejas

Ramírez

Morais

et al. 2008

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryObjective: Both transitory auditory otoemissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem responses (AABR) are considered adequate methods for universal hearing screening. The goal of this study was to compare the results obtained with each device, applying the same screening procedure. The population studied included all well newborns and those admitted to neonatal intensive care units (NICU). The first screening was normally undertaken with well babies during the first 48 h of life, before hospital discharge. Infants referred from this first step underwent a second screening after hospital discharge, before they were a month old. Results: The results from each study group were compared and analyzed for significant differences. TEOAE screening yielded 10.2% fail results from the first screening step; AABR gave 2.6%. In the second screening step, 2% of the newborns screened with TEOAE were referred, whereas 0.32% of those screened with AABR were referred. These differences are statistically significant.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs

Benito-Orejas

Ramírez

Morais

et al. 2008

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…15 Many UNHSI programs have been working to educate other stakeholders, but at least the following challenges remain.…”

Section: Lack Of Provider Knowledgementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Consequently, many pediatricians have not yet integrated follow-up on screening results into their newborn-care protocol. 15 One-third of the UNHSI programs reported that pediatricians in their state did not routinely review screening results for their newborn patients (as reported elsewhere in this supplemental issue, 16 this is sometimes because UNHSI programs do not report the needed information to the pediatrician). One-third of the UNHSI programs reported that pediatricians' and audiologists' lack of knowledge about the availability of EI services was a major problem in their state.…”

Section: Many Providers Lack Knowledge Of Ei or Family-to-family Suppmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Universal Newborn Hearing Screening and Intervention Program

et al. 2010

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

During the last 20 years, the number of infants evaluated for permanent hearing loss at birth has increased dramatically with universal newborn hearing screening and intervention (UNHSI) programs operating in all US states and many territories. One of the most urgent challenges of UNHSI programs involves loss to follow-up among families whose infants screen positive for hearing loss. We surveyed 55 state and territorial UNHSI programs and conducted site visits with 8 state programs to evaluate progress in reaching program goals and to identify barriers to successful follow-up. We conclude that programs have made great strides in screening infants for hearing loss, but barriers to linking families of infants who do not pass the screening to further follow-up remain. We identified 4 areas in which there were barriers to follow-up (lack of service-system capacity, lack of provider knowledge, challenges to families in obtaining services, and information gaps), as well as successful strategies used by some states to address barriers within each of these areas. We also identified 5 key areas for future program improvements: (1) improving data systems to support surveillance and follow-up activities; (2) ensuring that all infants have a medical home; (3) building capacity beyond identified providers; (4) developing family support services; and (5) promoting the importance of early detection. Pediatrics 2010;126:S19-S27

show abstract

“…Less recognized is the potential benefit of genetic and ophthalmologic evaluation of children and infants with sensorineural hearing loss. 17 Especially in young infants and children, referral to an otolaryngologist for a complete diagnostic assessment is essential. More than 90% of the children with permanent hearing loss are born to "hearing" parents, resulting in a sense of urgency for parents of newly identified children with hearing loss to seek out answers regarding etiology, risk of progression, implications, and other questions.…”

Section: Follow-up and Diagnostic Testingmentioning

confidence: 99%

Hearing Assessment in Infants and Children: Recommendations Beyond Neonatal Screening

Harlor¹,

Bower²

2009

Pediatrics

168

111

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

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.

show abstract

Primary Care Physicians' Knowledge, Attitudes, and Practices Related to Newborn Hearing Screening

Cited by 94 publications

References 24 publications

Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs

Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs

Evaluation of the Universal Newborn Hearing Screening and Intervention Program

Hearing Assessment in Infants and Children: Recommendations Beyond Neonatal Screening

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About