New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: effects of screening protocol on inpatient outcome measures

A convolutional neural network model detecting lasting behavioral changes in mice with kanamycin-induced unilateral inner ear dysfunction

In acute aminoglycoside ototoxicity of the unilateral inner ear, physical abnormalities, such as nystagmus and postural alteration, are relieved within a few days by neural compensation. To examine exploratory behavior over an extended period, behaviors of freely moving mice after unilateral kanamycin injection into the inner ear were recorded in a home cage environment. The tail was excluded from deep learning-mediated object detection because of its delayed movement relative to the body. All detection results were confirmed using a convolutional neural network classification model. In kanamycin-injected mice, the total distance moved in 15 min increased on postoperative day 3. Furthermore, injured mice turned more frequently toward the healthy side up to 17 days after the surgery. This tendency resulted in increased clockwise movements in home cage recordings. Moreover, tail suspension and twisting toward the healthy side induced a physical sign for up to 14 days after the injury; the mice rapidly rotated with dorsal bending. Our analysis strategy employing deep learning helps to evaluate neuronal compensatory processes for an extended period and is useful for assessing the efficacy of therapeutic interventions.

Protocol and programme factors associated with referral and loss to follow-up from newborn hearing screening: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

An effective newborn hearing screening programme has low referral rate and low loss to follow-up (LTFU) rate after referral from initial screening. This systematic review identified studies evaluating the effect of protocol and programme factors on these two outcomes, including the screening method used and the infant group.

METHODS

Five databases were searched (latest: April 2021). Included studies reported original data from newborn hearing screening and described the target outcomes against a protocol or programme level factor. Studies were excluded if results were only available for one risk condition, for each ear, or for < 100 infants, or if methodological bias was observed. Included studies were evaluated for quality across three domains: sample, screening and outcome, using modified criteria from the Ottawa-Newcastle and QUADAS-2 scales. Findings from the included studies were synthesised in tables, figures and text.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight studies reported on referral rate, 8 on LTFU rate, and 35 on both. Only 15 studies defined LTFU. Substantial diversity in referral and LTFU rate was observed across studies. Twelve of fourteen studies that evaluated screening method showed lower referral rates with aABR compared to TEOAE for well babies (WB). Rescreening before hospital discharge and screening after 3 days of age reduced referral rates. Studies investigating LTFU reported lower rates for programmes that had audiologist involvement, did not require fees for step 2, were embedded in a larger regional or national programme, and scheduled follow-up in a location accessible to the families. In programmes with low overall LTFU, higher LTFU was observed for infants from the NICU compared to WB.

CONCLUSION

Although poor reporting and exclusion of non-English articles may limit the generalisability from this review, key influential factors for referral and LTFU rates were identified. Including aABR in WB screening can effectively reduce referral rates, but it is not the only solution. The reported referral and LTFU rates vary largely across studies, implying the contribution of several parameters identified in this review and the context in which the programme is performed. Extra attention should be paid to infants with higher risk for hearing impairment to ensure their return to follow-up.

Audiologists’ Perceptions of Hearing Healthcare Resources and Services in South Africa’s Public Healthcare System

Background:

Hearing loss poses a significant burden globally. Its prevalence is exceptionally high in countries across the African region, where healthcare resources and services remain inaccessible. This study aimed to describe audiologists’ perceptions regarding hearing healthcare resources and services within South Africa’s public healthcare system.

Methods:

A national self-developed telephonic survey was conducted with audiologists in public healthcare system hospitals across South Africa, with the final sample comprising 100 audiologists.

Results:

Most (82%) audiologists indicated that their hospitals did not have adequate hearing healthcare resources to render efficient audiology services to patients. Binaural amplification devices (invasive and non-invasive) for adults with bilateral hearing loss who adhered to the criteria for these devices were perceived to be unavailable in most hospitals. Audiologists also perceived that universal newborn hearing screening services, adult aural rehabilitation services, and follow-up care for all hearing devices post-warranty expiration were limited.

Conclusion:

Efforts should be made to upsurge hearing healthcare resources, including increasing the financial budgets allocated to audiology resources so that increased diagnostic and screening audiology equipment and hearing devices can be procured where required, and additional audiologists can be employed within the South African public sector hospitals where needed.

Assessing Loss to Follow-up After Newborn Hearing Screening in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: Sociodemographic Factors That Affect Completion of Initial Audiological Evaluation

OBJECTIVES

Neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) patients are at high risk for congenital hearing loss. Previous studies have found sociodemographic factors associated with loss to follow-up for newborn hearing screening, but none have specifically studied the NICU population. Our objective is to determine if demographics and socioeconomic status is associated with loss to follow-up in a newborn population with extended NICU stay.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 443 NICU infants with extended NICU stay utilizing data extracted from infant and maternal medical records at an urban safety-net hospital.

RESULTS

Younger maternal age (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.95, confidence interval [CI] 0.91 to 0.99), higher gravidity (adjusted OR 1.39, CI 1.12 to 1.72), and former smoking status (adjusted OR 2.57, CI 1.07-6.18) were identified as independent predictors of loss to follow-up for NHS after conducting a multivariable logistic regression. Demographic and socioeconomic variables, such as sex, parity, birth weight, mode of birth, highest level of maternal education, maternal race/ethnicity, zip code metrics, and maternal language were not found to be associated with loss to follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Maternal age, gravidity, and smoking status are risk factors for loss to follow-up for NHS in newborns with extended NICU stay, a group at high risk for hearing loss. Our findings demonstrate that socioeconomic and demographic factors for loss to follow-up in the extended-stay NICU population are distinct from the well-baby population. Further investigation of these patients will allow prioritization of limited resources to subgroups within the extended-stay NICU population at risk for loss to follow-up for newborn hearing screening.

The History of Pediatric and Adult Hearing Screening

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS

To document the history of hearing seeing in children and adults.

STUDY DESIGN

A literature search in all languages was carried out with the terms of hearing screening from the following sources: Pub Med, Science Direct, World Catalog, Index Medicus, Google scholar, Google Books, National Library of Medicine, Welcome historical library and The Library of Congress.

METHODS

The primary sources consisting of books, scientific reports, public documents, governmental reports, and other written material were analyzed to document the history of hearing screening.

RESULTS

The concept of screening for medical conditions that, when found, could influence some form of the outcome of the malady came about during the end of 19th century. The first applications of screening were to circumscribe populations, schoolchildren, military personnel, and railroad employees. During the first half of the 20th century, screening programs were extended to similar populations and were able to be expanded on the basis of the improved technology of hearing testing. The concept of universal screening was first applied to the inborn errors of metabolism of newborn infants and particularly the assessment of phenylketonuria in 1963 by Guthrie and Susi. A limited use of this technique has been the detection of genes resulting in hearing loss. The use of a form of hearing testing either observational or physiological as a screen for all newborns was first articulated by Larry Fisch in 1957 and by the end of the 20th century newborn infant screening for hearing loss became the standard almost every nation worldwide.

CONCLUSIONS

Hearing screening for newborn infants is utilized worldwide, schoolchildren less so and for adults many industrial workers and military service undergo hearing screening, but this is not a general practice for screening the elderly.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

NA Laryngoscope, 131:S1-S25, 2021.

Hearing Loss and Failed Newborn Hearing Screen

Hearing loss is the most common congenital defect. With early diagnosis and intervention, we are able to improve speech and language outcomes in this population. In this article, we discuss the implications of the newborn hearing screen, as well as diagnostic interventions, management, and intervention, and the increasing role of congenital cytomegalovirus screening.

Universal Hearing Screening in Newborns Using Otoacoustic Emissions and Brainstem Evoked Response in Eastern Uttar Pradesh

The objectives were to determine the incidence of hearing impairment in a standardized population of neonates and to determine the significance of association of epidemiological and risk factors with neonatal hearing loss. A cohort of 600 newborns was selected for study and divided into two groups-525 in 'No Risk' group and remaining 75 in 'At Risk' group. The study protocol was carried out in three steps: (a) Screening of Hearing Loss with TOAE, done from 36 h after birth to 28 days of life, (b) Re-screening of hearing loss in newborns (of 4-12 weeks of age), who were tested positive for hearing loss in the first screening, done with DPOAE, (c) Confirmation of hearing loss with BERA, in those who were tested positive in both the first and second screening. In the study the incidence of hearing impairment in 600 infants screened was 6.67 per 1000 screened; 3.81 per 1000 screened in the Not at Risk group and 26.67 per 1000 screened in At Risk group. In At Risk group, admitted to the NICU, severe birth asphyxia and hyperbilirubinemia were found to be major risk factors. Loss to follow up was more in Not at Risk group and False Positive cases with TEOAE were more than DPOAE. BERA was found to be must for confirmation of hearing loss. Neonatal Hearing Screening of only At Risk population is likely to miss some hearing loss. Universal Hearing Screening should be the preferred strategy. Good follow up in the 'At Risk' group suggests that initial interventions in NICU had sensitized the parents for the possibility of hearing loss. This study recommends the introduction of two stage neonatal screening-rescreening protocol, using OAE and BERA, in the country in phased manner.

Sensitivity of the Automated Auditory Brainstem Response in Neonatal Hearing Screening

BACKGROUND

In a 2-stage neonatal hearing screening protocol, if an infant fails the first-stage abstract screening with an otoacoustic emissions test, an automated auditory brainstem response (ABR)test is performed. The purpose of this study was to estimate the rate of hearing loss detected byfirst-stage otoacoustic emissions test but missed by second-stage automated ABR testing.

METHODS

The data of 17 078 infants who were born at Lis Maternity Hospital between January 2013 and June 2014 were reviewed. Infants who failed screening with a transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) test and infants admitted to the NICU for more than 5 days underwent screening with an automated ABR test at 45 decibel hearing level (dB HL). All infants who failed screening with TEOAE were referred to a follow-up evaluation at the hearing clinic.

RESULTS

Twenty-four percent of the infants who failed the TEOAE and passed the automated ABR hearing screening tests were eventually diagnosed with hearing loss by diagnostic ABR testing (22/90). They comprised 52% of all of the infants in the birth cohort who were diagnosed with permanent or persistent hearing loss .25 dB HL in 1 or both ears (22/42).Hearing loss .45 dB HL, which is considered to be in the range of moderate to profound severity, was diagnosed in 36% of the infants in this group (8/22), comprising 42% of the infants with hearing loss of this degree (8/19).

CONCLUSIONS

The sensitivity of the diverse response detection methods of automated ABR devices needs to be further empirically evaluated.

Newborn hearing screening: analysis and outcomes after 100,000 births in Upper-Normandy French region

OBJECTIVES

Neonatal hearing impairment is a common disorder with a prevalence of 1 to 2‰ worldwide, with significant consequences on overall development when rehabilitated too late. New-born hearing screening has been implemented in the 1990s in most European countries and the USA. The Upper-Normandy region of France has been conducting a pilot program since 1999. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate and critically analyse it.

METHODS

The Upper-Normandy universal new-born hearing screening program is performed in two steps. Between 1999 and 2004, first, we administered a Transient Evoked Oto Acoustic Emission (TEOAE) test was administered a few days after birth for healthy newborns without risk factors. For newborns admitted to a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or presenting risk factors, was administered an automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) test prior to discharge. Second, newborns who failed the initial hearing screening were retested as outpatients using TEOAE. Since 2004, infants who failed the initial screen were tested with AABR 3 to 4 weeks later as outpatients, providing an opportunity to compare the two protocols.

RESULTS

Overall screening coverage in the Upper-Normandy region is 99.8%. First step coverage is 99.58% in well-infant nurseries and 97.09% in the NICU. The test-retest procedure during the first step and the use of AABR for the second resulted in higher follow-up rates and lower false positive rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The Upper-Normandy region universal newborn hearing screening program facilitated diagnosis and rehabilitation of infants before age of 9 months, most notably when severe to profound hearing impairment was found.

Assessment of the feasibility and coverage of a modified universal hearing screening protocol for use with newborn babies of migrant workers in Beijing

BACKGROUND

Although migrant workers account for the majority of newborns in Beijing, their children are less likely to undergo appropriate universal newborn hearing screening/rescreening (UNHS) than newborns of local non-migrant residents. We hypothesised that this was at least in part due to the inadequacy of the UNHS protocol currently employed for newborn babies, and therefore aimed to modify the protocol to specifically reflect the needs of the migrant population.

METHODS

A total of 10,983 healthy babies born to migrant mothers between January 2007 and December 2009 at a Beijing public hospital were investigated for hearing abnormalities according to a modified UNHS protocol. This incorporated two additional/optional otoacoustic emissions (OAE) tests at 24-48 hours and 2 months after birth. Infants not passing a screening test were referred to the next test, until any hearing loss was confirmed by the auditory brainstem response (ABR) test.

RESULTS

A total of 98.91% (10983/11104) of all newborn children underwent the initial OAE test, of which 27.22% (2990/10983) failed the test. 1712 of the failed babies underwent the second inpatient OAE test, with739 failing again; thus significantly decreasing the overall positive rate for abnormal hearing from 27.22% to 18.36% ([2990-973 /10983)]; p = 0). Overall, 1147(56.87%) babies underwent the outpatient OAE test again after1-month, of whom 228 failed and were referred for the second outpatient OAE test (i.e. 2.08% (228/10983) referral rate at 1month of age). 141 of these infants underwent the referral test, of whom 103 (73.05%) tested positive again and were referred for a final ABR test for hearing loss (i.e. final referral rate of 1.73% ([228-38/10983] at 2 months of age). Only 54 infants attended the ABR test and 35 (0.32% of the original cohort tested) were diagnosed with abnormal hearing.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study shows that it is feasible and practical to achieve high coverage rates for screening hearing loss and decrease the referral rates in newborn babies of migrant workers, using a modification of the currently employed UNHS protocol.

New system for neonatal hearing screening based on auditory steady state responses

NEURONIC-A 6.0 is a system for objective detection of hearing loss by means of the recording and analysis of auditory steady state responses. The system generates digitally Amplitude Modulated tones of different frequencies, allowing the mix of these and the simultaneous presentation through different transducers (earphone and bone vibrator) at different intensities. The system also includes a procedure for artefacts rejection based on the trajectory of variation of the residual noise through time and quantitative indicators or statistics, calculated in the frequency domain, to control the acquisition of the response process and detect automatically the presence or absence of the same. The whole working procedure is automated, which means that once the recording has started, a final result can be obtained in binary form (pass or fail) without the intervention of the examiner.

Hearing screening in a well-infant nursery: profile of automated ABR-fail/OAE-pass

OBJECTIVES

The goals were to examine the prevalence of a screening outcome pattern of auditory brainstem response fail/otoacoustic emission pass (ABR-F/OAE-P) in a cohort of infants in well-infant nurseries (WINs), to profile children at risk for auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder, and to compare inpatient costs for 2 screening protocols using automated auditory brainstem response (ABR) and otoacoustic emission (OAE) screening.

METHODS

A total of 10.6% (n = 2167) of 20 529 infants admitted to WINs in 2006-2009 were screened for auditory neuropathy spectrum disorder risk by using an experimental protocol (automated ABR testing first, followed by OAE testing if the automated ABR test was not passed). A second WIN cohort (n = 281) was screened by using the standard WIN protocol for the facility (OAE testing first, followed by automated ABR testing if the OAE test was not passed). Comparisons were made regarding preparation and testing times and personnel costs.

RESULTS

The ABR-F/OAE-P outcome was found for 0.92% of infants in WINs in inpatient testing and none in outpatient rescreening. The time for test preparation was 4 times longer and that for test administration was 2.6 times longer for the experimental protocol, compared with the standard protocol. Inpatient costs for the experimental protocol included 3 times greater personnel time costs.

CONCLUSIONS

Less than 1% of infants in WINs had ABR-F/OAE-P screening outcomes as inpatients and none as outpatients. These results suggest that prevalence is low for infants cared for in WINs and use of OAE testing as a screening tool in WINs is not unreasonable.

Newborn hearing screening in a developing country: results of a pilot study in Abidjan, Côte d'ivoire

OBJECTIVE

To investigate the feasibility of neonatal hearing impairment in newborn babies in Abidjan, Côte d'Ivoire.

METHODS

It is a cross-sectional study in which all infants aged from 3 to 28 days, attending for Bacille Calmette-Guerin (BCG) immunization in primary care centers or hospitalized in neonatal intensive care units (NICU), between July 2007 and March 2008, were included. Screening followed a two-stage strategy with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Infants referred after the second-stage screening were scheduled for diagnostic evaluation by diagnostic auditory brainstem response (ABR). The variables analyzed were: screening coverage, referral rates; return rates for second-stage screening and diagnostic evaluation, incidence of permanent hearing loss and age at diagnosis.

RESULTS

1306 newborns, of a total of 1495, were successfully screened, giving a screening coverage of 87.4%. The average age was 4.5 days (S.D.: 2.7), with 5.85 days (S.D.: 3.17) for the immunization group and 3.20 days (S.D.: 0.40) for the neonatal unit group. In total, 286 out of the 1306 infants (21.9%) were referred after the first-stage screening; out of which 193 (67.5%) return for the second stage. After the second-stage screening, 48 (16.8%) were scheduled for diagnostic evaluation (45 from NICU and 3 from primary care centers). The overall referral rate for diagnostic evaluation was 3.7% (48/1306). Only 18.75% of those referred (9/48) returned for evaluation, and seven of them (77.8%) were confirmed with hearing loss (2 from immunization group and 5 from neonatal unit group). The prevalence of permanent hearing loss in this screened population was 5.96 per 1000 (7/1174 babies who completed the screening) [95% I.C.: 5.62-6.30 per 1000]. The mean age at diagnosis was 22 weeks (S.D.: 8.3). The reasons for non-completed screening were, according to 62 mothers: no financial means, absence of hearing loss, fear of spouse reactions, lack of information about this test and deafness.

CONCLUSION

The incidence of permanent and early hearing impairment identified by this screening program was about 6 per 1000. Routine hearing screening of infants for the early detection of hearing loss is necessary in Côte d'Ivoire. It is possible to implement such a hearing screening, targeting all newborns, in primary health care centers and neonatal intensive care units.

Test accuracy and prognostic validity of multiple auditory steady state responses for targeted hearing screening

The test accuracy and prognostic validity of Multiple Auditory Steady State Responses (MSSR) and click Auditory Brainstem Responses (cABR) was compared within the context of a targeted screening protocol. A sample of 508 high-risk babies was first screened using cABR and MSSR (500 and 2000 Hz). All children (failed/ pass) were called back at three to four years of age to determine their hearing status (pure-tone audiometry). Although both methods showed an equally good test performance in the first screen (sensitivity: 100% and specificity: 92-95%), the MSSR may have some potential advantage to identify low-frequency hearing loss. Furthermore, the confirmatory audiometry with MSSR predicted the child hearing status more accurately than the cABR. In conclusion, the MSSR can provide valuable information for the diagnosis and management of infants earlier detected by a screening protocol and further developed might be also useful as a screening test.

Neonatal hearing screening: a combined click evoked and tone burst otoacoustic emission approach

OBJECTIVE

This study evaluated an alternative transient evoked otoacoustic emissions method for screening hearing in newborn babies that may reduce the referral rate of initial screening.

METHODS

A total of 1,033 neonates (2,066 ears) from two hospitals were recruited. Subjects had their hearing screened in both ears using a combined approach-both click evoked OAEs (CEOAEs) and 1kHz tone burst evoked OAEs (TBOAEs).

RESULTS

1kHz TBOAEs were more robust than CEOAEs in terms of emission response level and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) at both 1 and 1.5kHz frequency bands. The prevalence rate for CEOAE and TBOAE responses in these two frequency bands was significantly different. The combined protocol significantly reduced the referral rate-by almost 2 percentage points for first time screening.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a combined 1kHz TBOAE/CEOAE screening protocol is a feasible and effective way to reduce referral rates, and hence false positive rates, in neonatal hearing screening programs.

Neonatal hearing screening: evaluation of tone-burst and click-evoked otoacoustic emission test criteria

OBJECTIVE

Click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (CEOAEs) are widely used in universal neonatal hearing screening programs. A common finding in many such programs is a relatively high false-positive rate. This is often due to infant physiological noise adversely affecting the emission recording, leading to a "refer" screening outcome. In an attempt to reduce false-positive screening outcomes related to the effects of noise on otoacoustic emission response detection, tone-burst-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TBOAEs) were included in a neonatal hearing screening program because TBOAEs may elicit a greater signal-to-noise ratio than CEOAEs. The research project compared the pass/refer rate for a CEOAE-based test using established pass/refer criteria with the pass/refer rate for screening criteria that were based on TBOAE results alone or on combined CEOAE and TEOAE results.

DESIGN

Neonates were recruited at the Hong Kong Adventist Hospital, and both CEOAEs and TBOAEs were performed. Six passing criteria were used in this study, based on CEOAEs only; CEOAEs plus 1 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 2 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 3 kHz TBOAEs; CEOAEs plus 1, 2, and 3 kHz TBOAEs; and TBOAEs only.

RESULTS

Data from 298 neonates (546 ears) were obtained. Criteria set 1, using CEOAEs only, demonstrated a pass rate of 79.1%, and 114 ears were referred. Criteria set 2, using CEOAEs together with TBOAEs recorded at 1 kHz, passed 39 more ears than Protocol 1, and the pass rate was 86.3%. Hence, the overall referral rate for total number of screened ears decreased by 7.2 percentage points. Criteria set 3, using CEOAEs together with TBOAEs recorded at 2 kHz, and Criteria set 4, using CEOAEs in conjunction with TBOAEs recorded at 3 kHz, gave pass rates similar to Criteria set 1. Criteria set 5, using TBOAE information at frequencies where CEOAEs were not rated as "pass," raised the pass rate from 79.1 to 87.6%, reducing the overall referral rate by 8.5 percentage points. Criteria set 6, in which neonates were screened with TBOAEs recorded at 1, 2, and 3 kHz, gave a pass rate of 78.4%, similar to results for the CEOAE-only procedure.

CONCLUSIONS

Both Criteria sets 2 and 5, which combined CEOAE and TBOAE recordings, gave significantly higher pass rates than Criteria sets 1, 3, 4, and 6. The results suggest that the introduction of combined CEOAE and TBOAE protocols may assist in the reduction of refer outcomes, and hence the false-positive rates, of neonatal hearing screening programs.

Infant hearing screening at immunization clinics in South Africa

OBJECTIVE

Benefits of early identification and subsequent intervention for hearing loss are not accessible to infants in developing countries like South Africa. There are no systematic screening programs and traditional platforms for newborn hearing screening, such as well-baby and intensive care nurseries, do not provide sufficient coverage due to the high incidence of births at home or in primary healthcare facilities. Primary healthcare structures, in the form of immunization clinics, have been proposed as an alternative screening platform. The current study, therefore, investigates a hearing screening program implemented at two immunization clinics in a representative South African community.

METHODS

The two clinics in the current study were selected by a convenience sampling method in a community representative of large sections of the population. The hearing screening program was conducted over a 5-month period, and enrolled 510 infants (0-12 months of age). The screening protocol included Distortion Product Oto-Acoustic Emissions (DPOAE) and a high frequency probe tone (1000 Hz) tympanogram. Referral was based on one or both ears referring the DPOAE screen. Follow-up screening and diagnostic evaluations were scheduled for referred subjects.

RESULTS

Coverage with DPOAE amounted to 95% of the sample ears (93% of sample subjects) compared to tympanogram coverage amounting to 94% (93% of sample subjects). OAE pass rates were 93% for the sample ears with neonatal ears indicating a higher pass rate of 95% compared to 92% for infant ears (5-52 weeks of age). Eighty-seven percent of the sample ears indicated peaked tympanograms indicative of normal middle-ear functioning and neonatal ears presented with an increased incidence of peaked tympanograms (92%). A highly significant association between the DPOAE and high frequency tympanometric result was found. Follow-up screening appointments were scheduled for 68 subjects (14% of screened sample). Only 40% returned for the second follow-up and 44% for the third follow-up.

CONCLUSIONS

Immunization clinics indicate promise as infant hearing screening platforms, but identification of only bilateral hearing losses may be warranted initially to keep referral rates acceptably low. In addition to this efficient tracking systems are necessary to ensure acceptably high follow-up return rates are reached over time.

Initial Audiologic Assessment of Infants Referred From Well Baby, Special Care, and Neonatal Intensive Care Unit Nurseries

Purpose

The purpose of the study was to evaluate the effectiveness of a 2-hr initial audiologic assessment appointment for infants referred from area universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs to a clinical audiology department in an urban hospital.

Method

A prospective auditory brainstem response (ABR)-based protocol, including clicks, frequency-specific tone bursts, and bone-conducted stimuli, was administered by 10 audiologists to 375 infants. Depending on the ABR findings, additional test options included distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs), high-frequency tympanometry, and/or otologic examination.

Results

In 88% of the 2-hr test sessions, at least 4 ABR threshold estimates were obtained (i.e., bilateral clicks and either a 500- or 1000-Hz tone burst and a 4000-Hz frequency tone burst for the better ear). The incidence of hearing loss was significantly different across nursery levels: 18% for Level I (well baby), 29% for Level II (special care), and 52% for Level III (neonatal intensive care unit). Hearing loss type was defined at the initial assessment for 35 of the 51 infants with bilateral hearing loss based on bone-conduction ABR, latency measures, DPOAEs, high-frequency tympanometry, and/or otologic examination.

Conclusions

Our findings indicate that a 2-hr test appointment is appropriate for all nursery levels to diagnose severity and type of hearing loss in the majority of infants referred from UNHS. Examination by an otolaryngologist within 24–48 hr further defines the hearing loss and facilitates treatment plans.

A Case Study of an Emerging Community-Based Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Program: Part I. Parents’ Compliance

Purpose

This is the first of a 2-part series of articles that describe and assess an emerging community-based early hearing detection and intervention program. This study investigated parents’ compliance for accessing services for their infants at 5 levels in the process from referrals through subsequent follow-up during a 3-year period. Compliance was defined as parents’ follow-through with professionals’ recommendations and appointments for their infants’ hearing health care.

Method

Investigators retrospectively reviewed the charts of 51 infants who were referred from a regional hospital’s newborn hearing screening program to a private practice office and were seen from March 2000 to February 2003.

Results

Compliance was 100% for initial hospital inpatient screening and for outpatient rescreening but decreased throughout the referral process. All of the parents of babies with hearing loss complied, and their infants were diagnosed by age 3 months and received audiologic or otologic intervention by age 6 months. Only half of those who needed and opted for hearing aids complied and began habilitative intervention by age 6 months.

Conclusions

Although compliance for initial and follow-up screening was excellent and met goals for national benchmarks, compliance for intervention services showed room for improvement.

A Multisite Study to Examine the Efficacy of the Otoacoustic Emission/Automated Auditory Brainstem Response Newborn Hearing Screening Protocol

Purpose: This article examines whether changes in hearing screening practices are warranted based on the results of the recent series of studies by J. L. Johnson, K. R. White, J. E. Widen, J. S. Gravel, B. R. Vohr, M. James, T. Kennalley, A. B. Maxon, L. Spivak, M. Sullivan-Mahoney, Y. Weirather, and S. Meyer (Johnson, White, Widen, Gravel, James, et al., 2005; Johnson, White, Widen, Gravel, Vohr, et al., 2005; White et al., 2005; Widen et al., 2005) that found a significant number of infants who passed an automated auditory brainstem response (A-ABR) screening after failing an initial otoacoustic emission (OAE) screening later were found to have permanent hearing loss in one or both ears.

Method: Similar to the approach used by F. H. Bess and J. Paradise (1994), this article addresses the public health tenets that need to be in place before screening programs, or in this case, a change in screening practice (use of a 2-step screening protocol) can be justified.

Results: There are no data to suggest that a 2-step OAE/A-ABR screening protocol should be avoided.

Conclusion: Research is needed before any change in public policy and practice surrounding current early hearing detection and intervention programs could be supported.

A Multisite Study to Examine the Efficacy of the Otoacoustic Emission/Automated Auditory Brainstem Response Newborn Hearing Screening Protocol

Purpose: This 3rd of 4 articles on a study of the efficacy of the 2-stage otoacoustic emission/automated auditory brainstem response (OAE/A-ABR) newborn hearing screening protocol describes (a) the behavioral audiometric protocol used to validate hearing status at 8–12 months of age, (b) the hearing status of the sample, and (c) the success of the visual reinforcement audiometry (VRA) protocol across 7 sites.

Method: A total of 973 infants who failed OAE but passed A-ABR, in one or both ears, during newborn screening were tested with a VRA protocol, supplemented by tympanometry and OAE screening at age 8–12 months.

Results: VRA audiograms (1.0, 2.0, and 4.0 kHz) were obtained for 1,184 (82.7%) of the 1,432 study ears. Hearing loss was ruled out in another 100 ears by VRA in combination with OAE, for a total of 88.7% of the study sample. Permanent hearing loss was identified in 30 ears of 21 infants. Sites differed in their success with the VRA protocol.

Conclusions: Continued monitoring of hearing beyond the newborn period is an important component of early detection of hearing loss. Using a structured protocol, VRA is an appropriate test method for most, but not all, infants. A battery of test procedures is often needed to adequately delineate hearing loss in infants. Examiner experience appears to be a factor in successful VRA.

A multicenter evaluation of how many infants with permanent hearing loss pass a two-stage otoacoustic emissions/automated auditory brainstem response newborn hearing screening protocol

OBJECTIVE

Ninety percent of all newborns in the United States are now screened for hearing loss before they leave the hospital. Many hospitals use a 2-stage protocol for newborn hearing screening in which all infants are screened first with otoacoustic emissions (OAE). No additional testing is done with infants who pass the OAE, but infants who fail the OAE next are screened with automated auditory brainstem response (A-ABR). Infants who fail the A-ABR screening are referred for diagnostic testing to determine whether they have permanent hearing loss (PHL). Those who pass the A-ABR are considered at low risk for hearing loss and are not tested further. The objective of this multicenter study was to determine whether a substantial number of infants who fail the initial OAE and pass the A-ABR have PHL at approximately 9 months of age.

METHODS

Seven birthing centers with successful newborn hearing screening programs using a 2-stage OAE/A-ABR screening protocol participated. During the study period, 86634 infants were screened for hearing loss at these sites. Of those infants who failed the OAE but passed the A-ABR in at least 1 ear, 1524 were enrolled in the study. Data about prenatal, neonatal, and socioeconomic factors, plus hearing loss risk indicators, were collected for all enrolled infants. When the infants were an average of 9.7 months of age, diagnostic audiologic evaluations were done for 64% of the enrolled infants (1432 ears from 973 infants).

RESULTS

Twenty-one infants (30 ears) who had failed the OAE but passed the A-ABR during the newborn hearing screening were identified with permanent bilateral or unilateral hearing loss. Twenty-three (77%) of the ears had mild hearing loss (average of 1 kHz, 2 kHz, and 4 kHz < or =40-decibel hearing level). Nine (43%) infants had bilateral as opposed to unilateral loss, and 18 (86%) infants had sensorineural as opposed to permanent conductive hearing loss.

CONCLUSIONS

If all infants were screened for hearing loss using the 2-stage OAE/A-ABR newborn hearing screening protocol currently used in many hospitals, then approximately 23% of those with PHL at approximately 9 months of age would have passed the A-ABR. This happens in part because much of the A-ABR screening equipment in current use was designed to identify infants with moderate or greater hearing loss. Thus, program administrators should be certain that the screening program, equipment, and protocols are designed to identify the type of hearing loss targeted by their program. The results also show the need for continued surveillance of hearing status during childhood.

The Milan Project: a newborn hearing screening programme

AIM

Since 1997 a newborn hearing screening programme has been implemented by the U.O. Neurologia-Neurofisiopatologia and Dipartimento di Neonatologia of the Istituti Clinici di Perfezionamento ICP in Milan for both babies with no risk and those at risk of hearing impairment. This programme was named the Milan Project.

METHODS

The protocol for no-risk babies consisted of three stages: in the first two stages, newborns were tested with transient click-evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE), in the third one with conventional auditory brainstem responses (ABR). The first TEOAE test was performed by 36 h of age, before discharge, the second one after 15-30 d in case of referral, and the third one, by ABR, for those babies who failed the second TEOAE stage. Newborns at audiological risk were submitted to conventional ABR before the third month of corrected age. Some of this latter population was also submitted to the TEOAE test. The entire tested population (no-risk babies and newborns at audiological risk) consisted of 19 777 babies: 19 290 without risk ("no risk") and 487 at risk ("at risk").

RESULTS

During the course of the Milan Project, hearing impairment (ABR threshold equal to or greater than 40 dB nHL) was identified in 63 newborns (19 from the no-risk and 44 from the at-risk population), with a prevalence of 0.32%. Bilateral hearing impairment (BHI) was found in 33 newborns (10 from the no-risk and 23 from the at-risk population), corresponding to 0.17%. Among infants with bilateral hearing impairment, 30.3% had no risk factors. The prevalence of hearing impairment was determined on days 15-30 after birth.

CONCLUSIONS

The results show that the implementation of a hospital-based, universal neonatal hearing screening programme for babies with and without audiological risk is feasible and effective. The effectiveness of the programme has increased as a function of the years since its inception, with a strong decrease in the referral rate. Further improvement is obtained if the TEOAE measurements are repeated in cases of referral scoring before discharge.

Universal neonatal hearing screening moving from evidence to practice

Recent technological advances have made feasible universal newborn hearing screening and therefore early detection of permanent childhood hearing impairment. Over the past three years, new information has been published on whether early intervention is beneficial, the possibility of harm arising from newborn screening, and its cost. Dramatic progress has been made in the large scale implementation of universal screening in many parts of the western world.

Community-based newborn hearing screening program in Taiwan

OBJECTIVE

Congenital bilateral hearing impairment occurs in approximately 1 in every 1000 live births. Universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) programs are the most effective method for early diagnosis. Previously, newborn hearing screenings in Taiwan were often hospital-based. Our study is a community-based program designed to test the feasibility of performing neonatal hearing screening with a pay-for-test model, and to evaluate its acceptability to parents.

METHODS

From March 2000 to December 2002, two hospitals and four obstetric clinics in Tainan city participated in this study. The subjects were healthy newborns whose parents agreed to pay for otoacoustic emissions (OAE) hearing screening. They were tested in the newborn nursery before discharge. The protocol used an initial transient evoked otoacoustic emissions screening followed by a diagnostic auditory brainstem response (ABR) test.

RESULTS

A total of 10,008 healthy neonates were recruited, and 5938 newborns (59.3%) were tested. Prior to hospital discharge, 5403 of the newborns (91.0%) had passed the transient evoked otoacoustic emissions test. Referral for further testing was made in 9.0% of cases (535/5938). There were 140 babies lost to 1-month follow up. Only 395 infants (73.8%) of the infants that failed their first otoacoustic emissions tests underwent a second session at the outpatient clinic, and 91 babies failed. They were referred for further auditory brainstem response testing. Ultimately, nine babies were diagnosed with sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL).

CONCLUSIONS

There are difficulties in performing universal newborn hearing screening within Taiwan's health insurance system. This study was performed with the cooperation of hospitals and obstetric clinics, and was undertaken with a pay-for-screening model. Our program, with a pay-for-test model, of newborn hearing screening is feasible and was well regarded by parents in Tainan city. It could be run without the government's financial support.

Voluntary progress toward universal newborn hearing screening

OBJECTIVES

This study assessed the prevalence of newborn hearing screening in Wisconsin between 1997 and 2001, and examined factors leading to establishment of programs and influencing the outcomes of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS). The primary goal was to identify characteristics that might be important for states, provinces or countries that have not yet implemented UNHS programs and to examine some unique components of the Wisconsin UNHS program, that may provide direction to areas both with and without programs.

METHODS

The study consisted of two cross-sectional surveys administered at two separate time points (2000 and 2001). Additional data was provided by the Wisconsin Sound Beginnings Early Detection and Hearing Intervention database.

RESULTS

Between 1997 and 2001, the number of Wisconsin birthing hospitals with UNHS programs increased from two to 92 of a total of 103 and the percent of all Wisconsin newborns screened for hearing loss before 1-month of age increased from 10 to 90%. In 2001, 2.6% of screened newborns had an abnormal test requiring further audiologic evaluation, with a higher rate of referral in programs relying only on otoacoustic emission testing versus automatic auditory brainstem testing. As programs were being established, hospitals with greater number of deliveries more readily developed UNHS programs and hospitals with more deliveries were also significantly more likely to screen a greater percentage of delivered children once their programs were established. The Wisconsin Sound Beginnings program established a screening program for home birth infants in 2002 with a current screen rate of 79% for those midwives participating in this program.

CONCLUSIONS

A vast majority of Wisconsin hospitals have voluntarily implemented UNHS programs. By 2001, greater than 90% of all Wisconsin newborns were screened through a UNHS program. With education, financial support and a statewide network dedicated to UNHS it is possible to establish programs even for infants born in a setting that should be considered high-risk to miss hearing screening, such as home births and hospitals that perform relatively few numbers of deliveries per year. UNHS programs need to develop coordinated systems for linking these programs to audiologic diagnostic services and early intervention programs.

"Auditory neuropathy": physiologic and pathologic evidence calls for more diagnostic specificity

The term "auditory neuropathy" is being used in a rapidly increasing number of papers in the audiology/otolaryngology literature for a variety of individuals (mostly children) who fulfill the following criteria: (1) understanding of speech worse than predicted from the degree of hearing loss on their behavioral audiograms; (2) recordable otoacoustic emissions and/or cochlear microphonic; together with (3) absent or atypical auditory brain stem responses. Because of the general lack of anatomic foundation for the label "auditory neuropathy" as currently used, we review the anatomy of the auditory pathway, the definition of neuropathy and its demyelinating, axonal, and mixed variants. We submit that the diagnostic term "auditory neuropathy" is anatomically inappropriate unless patients have documented evidence for selective involvement of either the spiral ganglion cells or their axons, or of the 8th nerve as a whole. In view of biologic differences between peripheral nerves and white matter tracts in the brain, the term "auditory neuropathy" is inappropriate for pathologies affecting the central auditory pathway in the brainstem and brain selectively. Published reports of patients with "auditory neuropathy" indicate that they are extremely heterogeneous in underlying medical diagnosis, age, severity, test results, and that only a small number have undergone the detailed investigations that would enable a more precise diagnosis of the locus of their pathologies. The electrophysiology of peripheral neuropathies and the deficits expected with pathologies affecting the hair cells, spiral ganglion cells and their axons (auditory neuropathy sensu stricto), and brain stem relays are reviewed. In order to serve patients adequately, including potential candidates for cochlear implants, and to increase knowledge of auditory pathologies, we make a plea for more comprehensive evaluation of patients who fulfill the currently used audiologic criteria for "auditory neuropathy" in an effort to pinpoint the site of their pathologies. We suggest that the term auditory neuropathy be limited to cases in which the locus of pathology is limited to the spiral ganglion cells, their processes, or the 8th nerve, and that the term neural hearing loss be considered for pathologies that affect all higher levels of the auditory pathway, from the brainstem to the auditory cortex.

Neonatal hearing loss in the indigent

OBJECTIVE

To compare the risk factor profile for neonatal hearing loss (HL), and the follow-up rate of those identified with HL in an indigent population with those in an insured population.

STUDY DESIGN

Retrospective review.

METHODS

We studied 4526 neonates from the high-risk nursery or neonatal intensive care unit from two adjacent hospitals in Houston, Texas. Ben Taub General Hospital (BTGH) is a county public hospital that serves mainly the indigent. Texas Children's Hospital (TCH) is a private tertiary care center that serves patients with private insurance and Medicaid.

RESULTS

Overall, 133 infants failed the screening test. Follow-up diagnostic testing identified 48 patients with definite HL. Although nearly twice as many patients at BTGH failed screening compared with TCH (88 vs. 45), four times as many patients at BTGH did not return for diagnostic testing (43 vs. 10). When a hearing aid was needed, there was a delay in getting one at BTGH (P <.05). There was a higher prevalence of dysmorphic facial features and central nervous system disease and a lower prevalence of long-term ventilatory support at BTGH (P <.05). There were no differences between BTGH and TCH in the prevalence of low birth weight, neonatal asphyxia, syndromic stigmata, neonatal infection, family history of HL, or neonatal transfusion (P >.1).

CONCLUSIONS

Significant differences in the risk factor profile for neonatal HL exist between the indigent and the general population. A worrisome problem exists with the timely intervention in hearing-impaired indigent neonates.

Universal neonatal hearing screening: past, present, and future

After a brief review of the history of newborn hearing screening including the Downs behavioral testing procedure, the Crib-o-gram and similar devices, and the use of auropalpebral reflex and otoacoustic emissions, there is a discussion of key issues that need to be resolved before universal hearing screening is introduced. Included are questions regarding the target population(s) of screening programs, well baby versus NICU screening, dealing with false-positives and the effects on parent-child relationships, and finally, the availability of resources for screening and follow-up. The results of a recent study in the United Kingdom that assessed the current state of audiology services and found there is a difference between existing standards and what is actually being done in practice, are presented and considered in terms of current trends in the United States to move ahead with universal screening without a solid database of information regarding the preparedness of clinical centers to deal with the need for services that will result from the initiation of universal programs. Caution is urged.

The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: introduction and overview

OBJECTIVE

To determine the feasibility of universal newborn hearing screening, including intervention of identified infants, in the state of New York.

DESIGN

The New York State Department of Health issued a request for proposals that invited regional perinatal centers to apply for funding to implement universal newborn hearing screening. Hospitals were free to choose their own protocols but were to use physiologically based measures to screen infants for possible hearing loss. Criteria for passing the screening measures were common across sites. Infants failing the screening were to have diagnostic testing. Identified infants were to be followed by the state's Early Intervention Program and its associated Infant-Child Health Assessment Program.

RESULTS

Seven regional perinatal centers (eight hospitals) representing the various regions of the state were funded for 3 yr to implement universal newborn hearing screening and follow-up of identified infants. Detailed data analysis was performed for inpatient, outpatient, and intervention outcome measures and for the various protocols. Most of the outcome measures were analyzed in terms of year of program operation, nursery type, and geographic region of the state.

CONCLUSIONS

Universal newborn hearing screening was feasible in regional perinatal centers across the state of New York. The average ages of identification of hearing loss, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention were less than those reported in published studies where universal newborn hearing screening was not in place.

New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: inpatient outcome measures

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility of universal newborn hearing screening by examining inpatient outcome measures from 8 hospitals located in geographically diverse areas of New York State over a 3-yr period.

DESIGN

Funding was provided by the New York State Department of Health to implement predischarge hearing screening programs in the neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and well-baby nurseries (WBNs) of eight hospitals. Various screening protocols including transient evoked otoacoustic emissions alone or in combination with conventional auditory brain stem response or screening auditory brain stem response were implemented by each site. Measured outcomes included rate of misses, refusals, and fails. Results were analyzed as a function of year of operation, nursery type, and geographic location.

RESULTS

Six out of eight hospitals successfully implemented universal hearing screening during the first year, and the remaining 2 hospitals implemented programs during the second year of the project. Over a period of 3 yr, 69,761 newborns were screened at the eight hospitals representing 96.9% of all live births. The overall fail rate (4.04%) combined with the miss rate (2.61%) resulted in 6.63% of infants referred for outpatient follow-up. Mean data indicated that inpatient outcome measures improved with year of operation, with most individual hospitals also showing improvements. Both fail and miss rates were higher in the NICU than in the WBN and for hospitals located in New York City than in other regions of the state.

CONCLUSIONS

Inpatient outcome measures of a universal newborn hearing screening project, which involved multiple centers across geographically diverse regions of New York State, were acceptable in terms of successfully screening a high percentage of live births and attaining low refer rates for outpatient screening. This study adds to the growing body of literature supporting the feasibility of screening all newborns before hospital discharge.