Expérience du dépistage auditif néo-natal systématique dans le département de l’Eure

Newborn hearing screening: Prevalence and medical and paramedical treatment of bilateral hearing loss in a neonatal series in the Île-de-France region of France

OBJECTIVES

We report results for newborn hearing screening in a cohort of children born in the Île-de-France region of France, as part of a national screening program set up by the French national health insurance agency.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective study was performed on neonates undergoing hearing screening by automated auditory brainstem response at 35 dB in maternity departments between 2005 and 2011. In case of positive findings, a further check was performed; if this was also positive in one or both ears, the child was referred to the diagnostic center.

RESULTS

The study recruited 27,885 births; 96% of neonates were tested. Retest was positive in 0.84% of cases. Bilateral hearing loss was diagnosed in 0.63% of infants. Fifty-nine percent of these had ≥ 1 risk factor. Hearing normalized by end of follow-up in 25% of cases. Hearing loss was moderate in 59% of hearing-impaired children, severe in 12% and profound in 29%. Mean age at hearing aid fitting ranged from 4 months in profound hearing loss to 11.4 months in moderate hearing loss. In children receiving a cochlear implant, mean age at implantation was 14 months.

CONCLUSION

Newborn hearing screening is now public policy. It is effective in terms of exhaustiveness, age at diagnosis and early management. Caution is appropriate in the treatment of moderate hearing loss. In case of moderate hearing loss associated with otitis media serosa, transtympanic aerators should be suggested as of the age of 6 months to enable hearing threshold measurement. Hearing aid fitting can then be considered around 9 months of age if hearing has not improved.

[Analysis of specificity and sensitivity of Polish "Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Program"]

INTRODUCTION

Polish National Universal Hearing Screening Program (PNPUHS) has got three-level structure. Audiology Outpatient Clinic in The Childrens' Memorial Health Institute in Warsaw is a center of the second and the third level. Newborns are referred to us from neonatal units, the first level in the program. We found that referred children, both with unilateral as well as bilateral referral rating in TEOAE, show a high proportion of false positive results.

AIM

To analyze a diagnostic process of healthy neonates referred to our Audiology Outpatient Clinic with referral rating in one and both ears measured by TEOAE in 2005 and 2006. Assessed parameters include: attendance of patients to further diagnostics tests, with respect to their results, specificity and sensitivity of methods: TEOAE, DPOAE, analysis of final diagnoses of hearing loss.

PATIENTS

1764 infants without risk factors of hearing loss, aged from one to six months referred with referral rating in one or both ears in TEOAE.

METHODS

Diagnostics methods include: otoscopy, DPOAE, AI, BOA. Incorrect results are indication for ABR examination, if not conclusive ASSR. Collected data were statistically analyzed by chi-squared test and Czupurow and V-Cramer coefficient.

RESULTS

998 (56,5%) of 1764 examined children passed DPOAE. Only 512 (66,8%) of remaining 766 neonates carried on further investigations. Diagnosis of hearing loss was made in 449 patients (25%), including 320 (71%) with bilateral and 129 (29%) with unilateral involvement. Sensorineural hearing loss was detected in 274 children (61%), conductive in 161 (35,8%), and mixed in 14 patients (3,1%). Global PNUHSP specificity are 95,45% and sensitivity results are 95,08% respectively. Although in our Audiology Outpatient Clinic, sensitivity rate of TEOAE and DPOAE is 94,5%, and 94,4% respectively, the specificity rate of TEOAE appeared to be 36,9% and of DPOAE 79,7%.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal newborn hearing screening program permit early diagnosis and intervention in neonates and infants before 6th month of age. High rate of specificity and sensitivity characterizes the Polish Program. Low rate of specificity detected in our outpatient clinic indicates the necessity to effect and cost analysis in neonatal units. Comparison of two groups with bilateral and unilateral referral rating in screening shows that higher number of patients follow diagnostic process from the group with bilateral incorrect results, more diagnoses of hearing loss was established in this group as well.

Dépistage auditif néonatal systématique en région Champagne–Ardenne: à propos de 30500 naissances en deux années d'expérience

OBJECTIVES

To report a Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) program developed in the Champagne-Ardennes region in 2004-2005.

METHODS

A team of ENT specialists and pediatricians set up a UNHS program designed to reduce the age of diagnosis and care of bilateral congenital deafness. The program was mainly based on automated acoustic otoacoustic emissions and a strict follow-up by the Regional Neonatal Screening Center.

RESULTS

In 2004 and 2005, 29,944 neonates from 30,518 births were screened (98.11%). Of the neonates screened, 409 (1.38%) failed the test and were referred. The average retest delay was 2 weeks. Eleven were lost to follow-up, 371 (94%) had a successful second test on one or both ears, 27 (7%) failed the test a second time and had a diagnosis of ABR. Twenty-four cases of bilateral deafness were identified early, 14 of which had no risk factors. One of the children lost to follow-up was actually deaf, which was diagnosed at 18 months of age. Since the beginning of the UNHS program, the average age of diagnosis was lowered to less than 3 months.

CONCLUSION

Our experience tends to demonstrate that UNHS is possible and the program allows an early diagnosis of bilateral congenital hearing loss.

Universal neonatal hearing screening: the Siena (Italy) experience on 19,700 newborns

BACKGROUND

Hearing loss (HL) is likely to be the most common congenital abnormality in humans, with a reported prevalence of 1 to 3 per 1000 live births. Early detection and intervention is critical to prevent the adverse consequences of a delayed diagnosis on speech, language and cognitive development. As 33-50% of all congenital HLs cannot be detected in a selective hearing risk, use of universal neonatal hearing screening (UNHS) programs is expanding.

AIMS

We tested the value of a UNHS protocol, based on a two-stage strategy of Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions (TEOAEs) in all infants, followed by diagnostic auditory brainstem response (ABR) testing in those infants who did not meet TEOAE pass criteria and those infants at high risk for hearing loss.

METHODS

TEOAES (292 DP Echoport OAE Analyzer) served as the initial screen, followed by diagnostic ABR (Amplaid MK12) in newborns that did not meet pass criteria for TEOAEs. Additionally, all infants at high audiologic risk according to the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing received a diagnostic ABR evaluation. Of 21,125 total live births, 19,700 were tested (April 1, 1998-July 31, 2006). Accuracy of the UNHS strategy in predicting congenital HL was evaluated by calculating sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value and negative predictive value.

RESULTS

Prevalence for all HLs in the neonatal period was 1.78/1000 l.b. (35/19,700), with bilateral HL in 1.42/1000 l.b. (28/19,700) [low risk rate: 0.43/1000 l.b. (8/18,356); high risk infants rate: 14.88/1000 l.b. (20/1344)]. All the HL infants were diagnosed <3 and received intervention <6 months age. ROC curves results showed 100% sensitivity (95% C.I.: 89.0-100) and 99.3% specificity (95% C.I.: 99.2-99.4) of the two-stage strategy in detecting congenital HLs [area under the ROC curve: 0.997 (95% C.I.: 0.995-0.997)].

CONCLUSIONS

(1) The epidemiology of congenital HLs widely justifies UNHS; (2) a two-stage TEOAE and diagnostic ABR screening for congenital HL is feasible, minimally invasive and accurate in the early detection of congenital HL; and (3) a congenital HL screening strategy based exclusively on the use of TEOAEs should always consider the possibility of false negative cases.

Universal newborn hearing screening: a 27-month experience in the French region of Champagne-Ardenne

OBJECTIVES

This article reports the creation of a Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) program in a French region, Champagne-Ardenne, and the results of its first 27 months.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

We introduced a UNHS program in all the Champagne-Ardenne maternities in order to screen all newborns in the region. We used a two-step strategy. The first test consists of automated transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and is performed before discharge by a nurse or a midwife. If TEOAE are absent in both ears (positive screening test), the baby is referred to the second test, which could be either TEOAE or automated auditory brainstem response (aABR) 15 days after discharge, by a physician in an outpatient clinic. If the retest is positive in both ears, the baby is referred to diagnostic tests in a reference centre. This procedure also applies to newborns in neonatal intensive care units but, in those cases, the first test procedure is aABR because of the higher incidence of auditory neuropathies in those units. UNHS data are recorded with the other neonatal screening tests in the Regional Neonatal Screening Center, which facilitates the follow-up of newborns.

RESULTS

A total of 33 873 newborns were screened, which represents a coverage rate of 92.42%. In those babies, 33 431 had a negative first test and 429 were retested. There were 34 positive retests. Among those 34 children, 27 were actually deaf (0.08%). The median age at diagnosis was shortened from 17 months to 10 weeks.

CONCLUSION

Those 27-month results demonstrate the validity of our UNHS program, which relies on the cooperation with maternities, an easy protocol and a strong follow-up procedure.