Using otoacoustic emissions to screen for hearing loss in early childhood care settings

Eiserman, William D.; Hartel, Diana; Shisler, Lenore; Buhrmann, Jan; White, Karl R.; Foust, Terry

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2007.12.006

Cited by 44 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 20 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…The overall OAE 1 pass rate of 79% (see Table 2) is similar to the rate reported for children 0 to 3 screened in previous studies. 3,16 As would be expected, the refer rate was by far the highest among children who were being seen for ear-related concerns because blockage in the ear canal or middle ear fluid typically causes the ear to refer on OAE screening. The clinic PCP indicated that the OAE screening contributed to middle ear diagnosis and treatment decisions and an enhanced understanding of the value of referral for audiological assessment.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

“…In addition, illness, injury, and genetic factors cause hearing loss during early childhood, with estimates ranging from 1 to 3 per 1000 above those identified at birth. [3][4][5] The age at which hearing loss is identified is critical in terms of the efficacy of intervention; children who are identified and receive intervention early are more likely to demonstrate language development within the normal range by the time they enter school than those who are not identified and served early. 6 The American Academy of Pediatrics preventive guidelines recommend that infants receive an objective screening at birth and that subjective methods for monitoring be applied until children reach 4 years of age and are able to respond reliably to pure-tone audiometry.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…13 In a study of 4519 children 0 to 3 years of age, the positive predictive value was estimated to be 67% and the estimated negative yield was calculated to be 99%. 3 In 2 largescale OAE screening studies, sensitivity was found to be 85% 14 and 100%, 15 with both studies reporting specificity of 95%. Most recently, research exploring the use of OAE screening in federally qualified health centers supports its viability as a screening tool for infants and toddlers while asserting the importance of objective hearing screening surveillance to promote age-appropriate language acquisition.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Using Otoacoustic Emissions to Screen Young Children for Hearing Loss in Primary Care Settings

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

WHAT'S KNOWN ON THIS SUBJECT: The incidence of permanent hearing loss doubles between birth and school age. Otoacoustic emissions screening has been used successfully in early childhood educational settings to identify children with losses not found through newborn screening. WHAT THIS STUDY ADDS:Using otoacoustic emissions to screen the hearing of young children during routine health care visits is feasible and can lead to the identification of permanent hearing loss overlooked by providers relying solely on subjective methods. abstract OBJECTIVES: Otoacoustic emissions (OAE) technology, used widely in newborn hearing screening programs and validated by professional organizations as a reliable and objective tool, is beginning to be recognized as superior to subjective methods when screening young children in a variety of settings. This study examines the efficacy of integrating OAE hearing screening into services routinely provided in health care settings. METHODS:Three federally funded clinics serving low-income and uninsured people in a metropolitan area participated in the 10-month study. Subjects included 846 children (842 in the target population ,5 years of age and 4 older siblings) who were screened during routine visits to their primary care providers using a distortion product OAE instrument. A multistep screening and diagnostic protocol, incorporating middle ear evaluation and treatment, was followed when children did not pass the initial screening. Audiological evaluation was sought for children not passing a subsequent OAE screening. RESULTS:Of the 846 children screened, 814 (96%) ultimately passed the screening or audiological assessment and 29 (3%) exited the study. Three children (1 was ,5 years of age and 2 were .5) were identified with permanent hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS:The rate of identification of permanent hearing loss in this study is similar to findings from a study of OAE screening in early childhood educational settings. OAE screening holds the potential for being an effective method for helping to identify young children with permanent hearing loss in primary care settings.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 81%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Using Otoacoustic Emissions to Screen Young Children for Hearing Loss in Primary Care Settings

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Early childhood programs such as Head Start have implemented screening protocols to identify possible HL. These programs have successfully demonstrated that the screening protocols are feasible (Eiserman et al, 2008). A counterargument to continued monitoring in early childhood is the cost of such programs and the risk of referring children with normal hearing for additional testing.…”

Section: Nhs and Mild Hlmentioning

confidence: 99%

Service Delivery to Children With Mild Hearing Loss: Current Practice Patterns and Parent Perceptions

et al. 2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose This study investigates clinical practice patterns and parent perception of intervention for children with mild hearing loss (HL). Method Ages at and delays between service delivery steps (first diagnostic evaluation, confirmation of HL, hearing aid [HA] fitting, entry into early intervention) were investigated for 113 children with mild HL. Comparisons were made to children with moderate-to-severe HL. Parents of children with mild HL reported reasons for delays and their perceptions of intervention and amplification for their children. Results Seventy-four percent of children with mild HL were identified through the newborn hearing screen; 26% were identified later due to passing or not receiving a newborn hearing screen. Ninety-four percent of children with mild HL were fit with HAs, albeit at significantly later ages than children with moderate-to-severe HL. Most parents indicated that their children benefited from HA use, but some parents expressed ambivalence toward the amount of benefit. Conclusions Audiologists appear to be moving toward regularly providing amplification for children with mild HL. However, delays in HA fittings indicate that further educating professionals and parents about the benefits of early amplification and intervention is warranted to encourage timely fitting and consistent use of HAs.

show abstract

“…A recent study of 4,519 infants aged not more than 3 years concluded that DPOAE testing (using the same equipment and protocol of the present study) in several steps and monitoring guidelines are useful for detecting hearing loss. 27 This study started in 2006; at that point, the most recent JCIH recommendations were those of 2000. For completeness, our study included the JCIH indicators of the years 1994 and 2000.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prevalência de alterações auditivas em crianças de risco

Botelho¹,

Bouzada²,

Resende³

et al. 2010

Braz. j. otorhinolaryngol. (Impr.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Heari ng impairment is prevalent in the general population; early intervention facilitates proper development. Aim:To establish the prevalence of hearing impairment in infants at risk, born between June 2006 and July 2008, and to correlate the variables with hearing loss.Type of study: descriptive and cross-sectional. Materials and Methods:188 newborns were evaluated using evoked otoacoustic emissions and distortion product and auditory behavior. Tests were repeated if the results were altered. If altered results persisted, the child was referred for impedance testing and, when necessary, for medical evaluation. Infants with normal conduction were referred for brainstem auditory evoked potential testing. Results:Of 188 children two (1.1%) were excluded, and 174 (92.6%) had results within normal limits. Hearing impairment was found in 12 children (6.3%); hearing loss was retrocochlear in three infants (25%). Unilateral hearing loss was present in two infants (16.7%); bilateral hearing loss was present in 10 infants (83.3%). Conclusion:The high prevalence of hearing impairment in this population underlines the importance of early audiological testing. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2010;76(6):739-44. ORIGINAL ARTICLE BJORL

show abstract

Using otoacoustic emissions to screen for hearing loss in early childhood care settings

Cited by 44 publications

References 20 publications

Using Otoacoustic Emissions to Screen Young Children for Hearing Loss in Primary Care Settings

Using Otoacoustic Emissions to Screen Young Children for Hearing Loss in Primary Care Settings

Service Delivery to Children With Mild Hearing Loss: Current Practice Patterns and Parent Perceptions

Prevalência de alterações auditivas em crianças de risco

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About