Universal Newborn Hearing Screening

Thompson, Donovan J.; McPhillips, Heather; Davis, Robert L.; Lieu, Tracy A.; Homer, Charles J.; Helfand, Mark

doi:10.1001/jama.286.16.2000

Cited by 381 publications

(277 citation statements)

References 60 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

235

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The only group that has carefully considered the evidence related to newborn hearing screening and not unequivocally endorsed it is the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force [Thompson et al, 2001], but their conclusions have been widely misunderstood. Although they concluded that there is not yet clear evidence about whether newborn hearing screening results in better language outcomes, they clearly stated that universal newborn hearing screening is feasible to implement, results in earlier identification of hearing loss, and can be done with equipment which is accurate, practical to use, and economical [NCHAM, 2002d].…”

Section: The Support For Ehdi Programs From Governmental Professionamentioning

confidence: 99%

The current status of EHDI programs in the United States

White

2003

Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev.

108

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The importance of identifying congenital hearing loss during the first few months of life has been recognized for almost 60 years. Unfortunately, until more effective newborn hearing screening equipment and procedures were developed in the late 1980s, it was not practical to implement programs for identifying hearing loss during the first few months of life. This paper reviews the activities implemented by the federal government in the last 15 years to promote more effective Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) programs, and summarizes legislation passed by states related to universal newborn hearing screening. In surveys conducted in 1998 and 2001, State EHDI Coordinators were asked to rate the degree to which various issues were obstacles to implementing effective EHDI programs. The most serious obstacles are the shortage of qualified pediatric audiologists, inadequate reimbursement for screening and diagnosis, and lack of knowledge among primary health care providers about EHDI issues. Opposition to EHDI programs by hospital administrators was rated substantially lower in 2001 than in 1998. State EHDI Coordinators were also surveyed about how well their EHDI program is addressing issues related to screening, diagnosis, early intervention, linkages to medical home providers, tracking and data management, and family support programs. Although substantial progress has been made, many gaps remain with current EHDI programs.

show abstract

Section: The Support For Ehdi Programs From Governmental Professionamentioning

confidence: 99%

The current status of EHDI programs in the United States

White

2003

Ment. Retard. Dev. Disabil. Res. Rev.

108

105

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Prevalence of congenital and early-onset hearing impairment ranges from 0.5 to 5 per 1000 infants based on studies from various countries [1][2][3][4][5][6]. At least 90% of infants with hearing loss live in developing countries [7].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Outcomes with OAE and AABR screening in the first 48h—Implications for newborn hearing screening in developing countries

Dyk

Swanepoel

Hall

2015

International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Early discharge of newborns (<24 hours after birth) from birthing centres is an important barrier to successful newborn hearing screening (NHS) in developing countries. This study evaluated the outcome of NHS within the first 48 hours using an automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) device without the need for costly disposables typically required, and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE).Methods: NHS was performed on one hundred and fifty healthy newborns (300 ears) with TEOAE and AABR techniques before discharge at a hospital. A three-stage screening protocol was implemented consisting of an initial screen with TEOAE (GSI AUDIOscreener+) and AABR (Beraphone MB 11). Infants were screened at several time points as early as possible after birth. Infants were only re-screened if either screening technique (TEOAE or AABR) initially yielded a refer outcome. The same audiologist performed all TEOAE and AABR screenings. Results:Over the three-stage screen AABR had a significantly lower refer rate of 16.7% (24/144 subjects) compared to TEOAE (37.9%; 55/145 subjects). Screening refer rate showed a progressive decrease with increasing age. For both TEOAE and AABR, refer rate per ear screened 24 hours post birth was significantly lower than for those screened before 24 hours. For infants screened before 12 hours post birth, the AABR refer rate per ear (51.1%) was significantly lower than the TEOAE refer rate (68.9%). Overall AABR refer rate per ear was similar for infants screened between 24 to 36 hours (20.2%) and 36 to 48 hours (18.9%) but significantly lower than for TEOAE (40.7% and 41.9%, respectively). Lowest initial refer rates per ear (TEOAE 25.8%, AABR 3.2%) were obtained after 48 hours post birth. Conclusion:In light of the early post birth discharge typical in developing countries like South Africa, in-hospital screening with AABR technology is significantly more effective than TEOAEs. AABR screening with a device like the MB 11 is particularly appropriate because disposable costs are negligible.2

show abstract

“…Infants with hearing deficit can be evaluated in the most inexpensive way with hearing screening programs in the neonatal period and can be diagnosed definitely (1)(2)(3). Social, emotional, cognitive and language development of infants is provided by early diagnosis of hearing deficit (4)(5)(6).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Social, emotional, cognitive and language development of infants is provided by early diagnosis of hearing deficit (4)(5)(6). Hearing deficit is reported with a rate of 1-6 in 1000 live births in healthy newborns, while it reaches up to 10-30 in 1000 live births in newborns with risk factors (1,7,8).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Zekai Tahir Burak Women’s Health Education and Research Hospital newborn hearing screening results and assessment of the patients

Çelik¹,

Canpolat²,

Demırel³

et al. 2014

Turk Arch Ped

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Aim: Social, emotional, cognitive and language development of infants is provided with early diagnosis of hearing deficit. Hearing deficit is reported with a rate of 1-6 in 1000 live births in healthy newborns, while it reaches up to 10-30 in 1000 live births in newborns with risk factors. We aimed to compile the results of the hearing screening program applied in our hospital. Material and Methods:The records of the hearing screening program were examined and the results were compiled by reaching the records of the patients who were found to have hearing deficit. Results:Hearing test was applied in a total of 142 128 patients between 2005 and 2011. Hearing test was performed by evoked autoaucistic emission for two times in 26 690 of these patients and for three times in 2 412. A diagnosis of hearing deficit was made in 385 patients (0.27%) after application of ARB (Auditory Brainstem Response). The medical records of 171 of the patients who were referred for advanced investigations and treatment were obtained. 116 of these patients had a history of hospitalization in neonatal intensive care unit, while 55 patients had no history of hospitalization in neonatal intensive care unit. 49 of the patients had a gestational age below the 32 th week and 122 had a gestational age above the 32 th week. The median gestational age and birth weight values and ranges were found to be 35 (22-43) and 2 140 g (580-4 590 g), respectively. The risk factors included intrauterine growth retardation (n=24), multiple pregnancy (n=22), hyperbilirubinemia (n=74), blood exchange because of hyperbilirubinemia (n=7), sepsis (n=52), hypoglycemia (n=2), use of aminoglycoside and glycopeptide (n=99), use of furosemide (n=27), mechanical ventilation therapy (n=37), polycythemia (n=12), prenatal asphyxia (n=2), respiratory distress syndrome (n=45), chronic lung disease (n=11), surgery for retinopathy of prematurity (n=8) and hearing deficit in the mother or father (n=7). Conclusions:In addition to the necessity of performing hearing screening in all newborns, infants with risk factors should be determined, hearing deficit should be screened with repeated hearing tests and social, emotional, cognitive and language development of the infant should be assured. (Türk Ped Arş 2014; 49: 138-41)

show abstract

Universal Newborn Hearing Screening

Cited by 381 publications

References 60 publications

The current status of EHDI programs in the United States

The current status of EHDI programs in the United States

Outcomes with OAE and AABR screening in the first 48h—Implications for newborn hearing screening in developing countries

Zekai Tahir Burak Women’s Health Education and Research Hospital newborn hearing screening results and assessment of the patients

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About