The Milan Project: a newborn hearing screening programme

Quality measures of two-stage newborn hearing screening: systematic review and meta-analysis

Introduction

Newborn screening for hearing impairment (NHS) is a crucial public health issue worldwide. Often, a two-stage screening with two different testing approaches is used. We aimed to investigate the optimal screening algorithm, based on data from the literature published in the last 30 years. A particular focus of the study was to synthesize the existing evidence on two-stage newborn hearing screening regarding the refer rate (RFR), the percentage of children that did not pass the second test or were lost after the first test.

Methods

We searched MEDLINE and Scopus for studies on two-stage NHS using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) or automated auditory brainstem response (AABR). All studies on newborns who received their first test as an inpatient and a second test up to 1 month later were eligible. Random effects meta-analysis was performed to estimate RFR. Risk of bias was assessed using QUADAS-II. The unfunded study was registered in PROSPERO (CRD42023403091, available at https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/view/CRD42023403091).

Results

Eighty-five study protocols, including over 1,120,000 newborns, met the inclusion criteria. Certainty in the evidence was rated as moderate.

Discussion

Strategies that did not involve changes to the screening method had a lower RFR. AABR-AABR: RFR = 1.3% [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.9, 1.8%], TEOAE-TEOAE: RFR = 2.7% (CI: 2.2, 3.2%), TEOAE-AABR: RFR = 3.9% (CI: 2.9, 5.1%), AABR-TEOAE: 5.9% (CI: 5.0, 6.9%). Consequently, where feasible, changing the screening method at the second screening should be avoided in order to minimize the number of follow-up examinations.

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.

Performance and characteristics of the Newborn Hearing Screening Program in Campania region (Italy) between 2013 and 2019

Purpose

Universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) in the first month of life is crucial for facilitating both early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) of significant permanent hearing impairment (PHI). In Campania region, UNHS has been introduced in 2003 by the Regional Council Resolution and started on January 2007. The aim of this paper is to update a previous article describing the performance of the program since its implementation in the period between 2013 and 2019.

Methods

A longitudinal retrospective study was carried at the Regional Reference Center III on 350,178 babies born in the analysis period. The paper reports the main results of overall coverage, referral rate, lost-to-follow-up rate,yield for PHI and shall determine various risk factor associations with hearing impairment

Results

In Campania region, 318,878 newborns were enrolled at I level, with a coverage rate of 91.06%, 301,818 (86.18%) Well Infant Nurseries (WIN) and 17,060 (5.35%) Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU) babies. PHI was identified in 413 children, 288 (69.73%) bilaterally and 125 (30.26%) unilaterally. The overall cumulative incidence rate of PHI was 1.29 per 1000 live-born infants (95% CI 1.17–1.42) with a quite steady tendency during the whole study period.

Conclusions

This study confirms the feasibility and effectiveness of UNHS in Campania region also in a setting with major socioeconomic and health organization restrictions.The program meets quality benchmarks to evaluate the progress of UNHS. Nowadays, it is possible to achieve an early diagnosis of all types of HL avoiding the consequences of hearing deprivation.

Early detection of neonatal hearing loss by otoacoustic emissions and auditory brainstem response over 10 years of experience

OBJECTIVES

A number of different screening protocols for detecting neonatal hearing loss currently exist. We present our 10 years of experience with using auditory brainstem response (ABR) complementary to otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) in the three phases hearing screening process in our hospital. Furthermore, we want to demonstrate the usefulness of these screening techniques used in combination, that remain valid to identify cases of neonatal hearing loss and meet the well-established program quality criteria for these screening protocols.

METHODS

Data were collected retrospectively from patient record forms completed on 9698 newborns from 2007 to 2017. The screening protocol for neonatal hearing loss in our centre is carried out in three phases. First phase, prior to discharge from the hospital, consists of carrying out the OAE evaluation on the newborn. Second phase is carried out in the paediatric consultation department. There, the newborns who did not pass the first phase are again studied with OAE. If this phase is not passed either, the child is referred to a third phase for the realization of ABR, in the clinical neurophysiology service. Newborns with risk factors for hearing loss, identified in the first phase, also go on to this third phase. When this hearing threshold exceeds 30 dB, it is considered abnormal. Cases with abnormal ABR, has a re-test conducted within the next six months from the initial ABR assessment.

RESULTS

A total of 9390 (97.1%) OAEs were performed during first phase, with 8245 newborns (87.8%) passing the screening test, while 1145 children (12.1%) presented an abnormal OAE and were included in the second screening phase. Second phase involving a repeat OAE examination performed on 1077 newborns (94%). In this second phase, 941 newborns (87.3%) passed the test. Nevertheless, 136 newborns (12.6%) failing the retest and were referred to continue on to phase three. Furthermore, 181 newborns (1.8%) presented high-risk factors at birth and were also included in this third phase. However, in the registries of children referred to this phase, only 255 (80%) ABR evaluations were confirmed. In total, 227 newborns (2.3%) were missed from the first to third phases of the screening process. According to the database of the clinical neurophysiology service, ABRs evaluations were performed in 352 newborns referred between December 2007 and December 2017. Of this sample, 38.9% were boys and 61.1% were girls. From among cases underwent ABR, 34% of newborns did not pass the OAEs. The most common risk factor was prematurity (with admission to the neonatal intensive care unit for more than five days), affecting 28%. Abnormal ABRs waveforms were found in 43.9%, with 12.3% having a sensorineural hearing loss, 26.5% showing mixed hearing loss and, conductive hearing loss being present in 61.9%. Considering sensorineural hearing loss and other types of severe hearing loss, affected patients constituted only 1.7% of the total number of individuals studied. Finally, regarding quality control of the program participation in the first phase of care included 97.2% of all newborns, yielding a third phase referral rate of 2.9%, confirmation of a diagnosis before the fourth month of life in more than 90% of cases with an average of 3.4 months of age, and a hearing impairment detection rate as an outcome indicator of 4.5%.

CONCLUSIONS

Our data are similar to those of previous studies on screening for hearing loss in newborns. We have demonstrated the advantages of carrying out this protocol in three phases using the otoacoustic emissions together with auditory brainstem response, diagnostic tools that remain as a Gold Standard. Also, we want to highlight and demonstrate the importance of interdisciplinary coordination between the paediatric and clinical neurophysiology services in the implementation of this screening protocol. The foregoing has allowed us to comply with the proposed quality indicators, reaching coverage percentages of more than 95%, confirming the diagnosis of hearing loss within the first six months of life and making timely referrals to benefit the newborns with hearing impairment by way of treatment and follow-up in the early stages of development, avoiding future disabilities.

Who misses the newborn hearing screening? Five years' experience in Friuli-Venezia Giulia Region (Italy)

INTRODUCTION

Permanent hearing impairment is the most common sensory disorder in newborns. The Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) is widely adopted as a cost-effective procedure to achieve early identification and treatment of congenital hearing impairment, with the final goal of an improved linguistic and cognitive outcome for hearing impaired children. The Italian Ministry of Health has recently comprised UNHS in the Essential Level of Health Assistance. Nevertheless, programs still vary both across and within Italian Regions in terms of coverage, testing, referral and tracking protocols. In Friuli-Venezia Giulia region the program for the early identification of newborn and childhood hearing impairment is operative since 2012. In order to minimize the lost to follow-up cases, UNHS and childhood hearing surveillance activities have been organized in close collaboration among birth centres, paediatric audiology services, territorial Family Paediatricians and the sole regional centre for paediatric hearing loss management.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

We performed a five years' retrospective analysis of the UNHS experience in Friuli-Venezia Giulia comparing the UNHS activity of year 2013 and year 2017. The focus of the study concerns the "missing" cases. Three different typologies of "miss" cases ("documentation-miss", "access-miss" and "pathway-miss") have been defined in correspondence with main reasons for their occurrence.

RESULTS

Births in Friuli-Venezia Giulia were 9465 and 8432, respectively in 2013 and 2017. International quality indicators improved with a gain of efficiency in 5 years' experience. However, "missing" cases were 486 in 2013 and 321 in 2017, mainly due to the lack of an efficient documentation system.

CONCLUSION

UNHS programs have proven to be valuable and cost-effective in Friuli-Venezia Giulia and other Italian regions. New resources and efforts are required to achieve a complete standardization and informatisation of the UNHS data to avoid documentation gaps. A possible strategy would point to the opportunity to unify data management systems for all the ongoing newborn screening programs (metabolic, hearing and visual), linking the integrated IT system with the regional repository of current datasets.

Newborn hearing screening at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit and Auditory Brainstem Maturation in preterm infants

OBJECTIVES

Aim of this study is to report and discuss the results of 4 years of Newborn hearing screening (NHS) program at the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU), particularly evaluating the clinical ABR results.

METHODS

Retrospective study. NHS data from NICU newborns, admitted for ≥5 days, in the period from January 1st^, 2013 and December 31st^, 2016, were retrieved and analyzed. NHS results were classified as following: (i) "pass" when both ears for both the a-TEOAE (automated Transient-Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions) and the a-ABR (automated Auditory Brainstem Response) protocol resulted as "pass"; (ii) "fail" when one ear, at either one of the two performed tests resulted as "fail"; (iii) "missing" when the newborns were not tested with both protocols. All "fail" and "missing" newborns were retested (with both tests): in the case of a second "fail" result, a clinical ABR was performed within a period of 3 months.

RESULTS

A total of 1191 newborns were screened. From those, 1044/1191 resulted as "pass", 108/1191 as "fail", and 39/1191 as "missing". During the re-testing of these 147 newborns, 43 were assigned as "missing", 63 were assigned as "pass" (showing bilaterally a wave V identifiable within 30 dB nHL) and 25 failed the retest and/or did not present an identifiable wave V within 30 dB nHL. Among the 147 retested infants, we identified a group of 16 subjects who resulted as NHS "refer" and who, during the audiological follow-up, showed either: (i) a unilateral or bilateral wave V identifiable over 30 dB nHL, at the first clinical ABR assessment; or (ii) a bilateral wave V identifiable within 30 dB nHL, in a following clinical ABR test during the first year of life. These 16 subjects were defined to have an 'Auditory Brainstem Maturation' issue.

CONCLUSIONS

A possible "maturation" of the ABR response (and therefore of the auditory pathway) has been hypothesised in 16 out of 1191 infants (1.3%). A delay of the auditory pathway maturation in preterm babies compared to term newborns has already been suggested in the literature. A possible delay of the NHS retest could be considered, in selected cases, with significant savings in economic resources and parental anxiety.

Universal newborn hearing screening in the Lazio region, Italy

Background

The introduction of Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) programs has drastically contributed to the early diagnosis of hearing loss in children, allowing prompt intervention with significant results on speech and language development in affected children. UNHS in the Lazio region has been initially deliberated in 2012; however, the program has been performed on a universal basis only from 2015. The aim of this retrospective study is to present and discuss the preliminary results of the UNHS program in the Lazio region for the year 2016, highlighting the strengths and weaknesses of the program.

Methods

Data from screening facilities in the Lazio region for year 2016 were retrospectively analyzed. Data for Level I centers were supplied by the Lazio regional offices; data for Level II and III centers were provided by units that participated to the study.

Results

During 2016, a total of 44,805 babies were born in the Lazio region. First stage screening was performed on 41,821 children in 37 different birth centers, with a coverage rate of 93.3%. Of these, 38.977 (93.2%) obtained a “pass” response; children with a “refer” result in at least one ear were 2844 (6.8%). Data from Level II facilities are incomplete due to missing reporting, one of the key issues in Lazio UNHS. Third stage evaluation was performed on 365 children in the three level III centers of the region, allowing identification of 70 children with unilateral (40%) or bilateral (60%) hearing loss, with a prevalence of 1.6/1000.

Conclusions

The analysis of 2016 UNHS in the Lazio region allowed identification of several strengths and weaknesses of the initial phase of the program. The strengths include a correct spread and monitoring of UNHS among Level I facilities, with an adequate coverage rate, and the proper execution of audiological monitoring and diagnosis among Level III facilities. Weakness, instead, mainly consisted in lack of an efficient and automated central process for collecting, monitoring and reporting of data and information.

Universal newborn hearing screening using A-TEOAE and A-ABR: The experience of a large public hospital

BACKGROUND

Universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) aims to identify hearing loss in the early postnatal period; prompt detection of bilateral or unilateral hearing loss is mandatory for timely intervention.

METHODS

This retrospective study reports the results of the first two years of a UNHS program on 4,719 newborns in a large public Italian hospital. Screening was divided into two levels: automated transient otoacoustic emissions were used for first level; automated auditory brainstem response for second level. Second level included children with a "refer" response at first level and babies with a family history for hearing loss or other risk factors. Hearing loss diagnosis was made using clinical auditory brainstem response.

RESULTS

During first level, 254 (5.4% ) newborns were "refer". At retest, 130 (51.1% ) babies were PASS and 48 (18.8% ) were "refer". 76 babies dropped out (29.9% ). 146 babies (3.1% ) were referred to the second level: 48 for a "refer" response at first level and 98 for a PASS response but potential hearing loss due to risk factors. 24 babies dropped out (16.4% ). Out of 122 newborns tested in the second level, 105 (86.1% ) had a PASS response and 17 (13.9% ) were "refer". Our screening protocol identified 7 (0.14% ) babies with profound hearing loss; 5 had unilateral and 2 had bilateral hearing loss. 2 babies dropped out at diagnostic level (11.8% ).

CONCLUSIONS

A correct and early diagnosis of hearing loss is mandatory to prevent permanent consequences; the spread of hearing screening programs is the optimal solution to reach this goal.

Main outcomes of a newborn hearing screening program in Belgium over six years

OBJECTIVE

To present the outcomes of the newborn hearing screening program in Belgium (French-speaking area) since its implementation and to analyze its evolution between 2007 and 2012 in the neonatal population without reported risk factors for hearing loss.

METHODS

The study was descriptive and based on a retrospective analysis of six annual databases (2007-2012) from the newborn hearing screening program. The main outcomes were identified: prevalence of reported hearing impairment; coverage rates (first and second test, follow-up); proportions of conclusive screening tests; referral rate. Each outcome was presented for the six years and by year of birth. Chi-squares were used to study differences in the various outcomes according to time.

RESULTS

Over the six years, 264,508 newborns were considered as eligible for the screening. Hearing impairment was confirmed in 1.41‰ (n = 374) of them, with significant disparities from year to year, between 0.67‰ and 1.94‰. Analysis of the screening process showed that only 92.71% (n = 245,219) of the eligible newborns underwent a first hearing test. This coverage rate varied greatly over time: at the beginning, less than 90% of the newborns had a first test and it rose to almost 95%. After the two screening steps, 2.40% (n = 6340) of the newborns were referred to an ENT doctor; the referral rate slightly decreased during the first years of the program and then stabilized around 2.4%. Over the period, only 62.21% of the referred newborns had a follow-up; the follow-up rate was particularly low for the first year (44.91%) and then strongly increased (+19.52% in 2008) but never exceeded 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

Outcome measures for the newborn hearing screening program in Belgium are lower than the benchmarks released by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Nevertheless, the evolution of the outcome measures since the implementation of the program has been positive, particularly during the first years. At some point, most of the outcome measures decreased or at least did not change any further. The motivation and commitment of the professionals have to be supported in a variety of ways to improve outcome measures and thus, the quality of the program.

Putting newborn hearing screening on the political agenda in Belgium: local initiatives toward a community programme - a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The Kingdon model, based on the convergence of three streams (problem, policy, and politics) and the opening of a policy window, analyses the process by which a health issue is placed on the political agenda. We used this model to document the political agenda-setting process of the newborn hearing screening programme in Belgium.

METHODS

A qualitative study based on a document review and on semi-directed interviews was carried out. The interviews were conducted with nine people who had played a role in putting the issue in question on the political agenda, and the documents reviewed included scientific literature and internal reports and publications from the newborn hearing screening programme. The thematic analysis of the data collected was carried out on the basis of the Kingdon model's three streams.

RESULTS

The political agenda-setting of this screening programme was based on many factors. The problem stream included factors external to the context under study, such as the technological developments and the contribution of the scientific literature which led to the recommendation to provide newborn hearing screening. The two other streams (policy and politics) covered factors internal to the Belgian context. The fact that it was locally feasible with financial support, the network of doctors convinced of the need for newborn hearing screening, the drafting of various proposals, and the search for financing were all part of the policy stream. The Belgian political context and the policy opportunities concerning preventive medicine were identified as significant factors in the third stream. When these three streams converged, a policy window opened, allowing newborn hearing screening onto the political agenda and enabling the policy decision for its introduction.

CONCLUSIONS

The advantage of applying the Kingdon model in our approach was the ability to demonstrate the political agenda-setting process, using the three streams. This made it possible to identify the many factors involved in the process. However, the roles of the stakeholders and of the context were somewhat inexplicit in this model.

Contralateral ear occlusion for improving the reliability of otoacoustic emission screening tests

Newborn hearing screening is an established healthcare standard in many countries and testing is feasible using otoacoustic emission (OAE) recording. It is well documented that OAEs can be suppressed by acoustic stimulation of the ear contralateral to the test ear. In clinical otoacoustic emission testing carried out in a sound attenuating booth, ambient noise levels are low such that the efferent system is not activated. However in newborn hearing screening, OAEs are often recorded in hospital or clinic environments, where ambient noise levels can be 60–70 dB SPL. Thus, results in the test ear can be influenced by ambient noise stimulating the opposite ear. Surprisingly, in hearing screening protocols there are no recommendations for avoiding contralateral suppression, that is, protecting the opposite ear from noise by blocking the ear canal. In the present study we have compared transient evoked and distortion product OAEs measured with and without contralateral ear plugging, in environmental settings with ambient noise levels <25 dB SPL, 45 dB SPL, and 55 dB SPL. We found out that without contralateral ear occlusion, ambient noise levels above 55 dB SPL can significantly attenuate OAE signals. We strongly suggest contralateral ear occlusion in OAE based hearing screening in noisy environments.

Prevalence of auditory changes in newborns in a teaching hospital

Introduction: The precocious diagnosis and the intervention in the deafness are of basic importance in the infantile development. The loss auditory and more prevalent than other joined riots to the birth.

Objective: Esteem the prevalence of auditory alterations in just-born in a hospital school.

Method: Prospective transversal study that evaluated 226 just-been born, been born in a public hospital, between May of 2008 the May of 2009.

Results: Of the 226 screened, 46 (20.4%) had presented absence of emissions, having been directed for the second emission. Of the 26 (56.5%) children who had appeared in the retest, 8 (30.8%) had remained with absence and had been directed to the Otolaryngologist. Five (55.5%) had appeared and had been examined by the doctor. Of these, 3 (75.0%) had presented normal otoscopy, being directed for evaluation of the Evoked Potential Auditory of Brainstem (PEATE). Of the total of studied children, 198 (87.6%) had had presence of emissions in one of the tests and, 2 (0.9%) with deafness diagnosis.

Conclusion: The prevalence of auditory alterations in the studied population was of 0,9%. The study it offers given excellent epidemiologists and it presents the first report on the subject, supplying resulted preliminary future implantation and development of a program of neonatal auditory selection.

Respostas falso-positivas na triagem auditiva neonatal universal: possíveis causas

OBJETIVO: avaliar a ocorrência de respostas falso-positivas na Triagem Auditiva dentro de uma maternidade particular, suas possíveis causas e soluções. MÉTODOS: foram avaliados 1.110 recém-nascidos eutróficos entre 6 e 48 horas de vida no berçário, com o analisador de Emissões Otoacústicas Evocadas Transientes (EOATE) modelo Echochek da Ilodynamics Ltd. Na ausência de resposta, foi realizada a manipulação do meato acústico externo (Manobra Facilitadora) e colhido novo resultado. Os que falharam foram retestados em 15 dias. RESULTADOS: 50,09% dos RN falhou na primeira tentativa. Após a manobra facilitadora, 24,41% continuou falhando, mas demonstraram EOATE presentes no reteste. O tempo médio de internação foi de 42,27 h, sendo 93,42% oriundos de cesareana. Pertenciam a convênios particulares padrão enfermaria 98% e 2% quarto individual. A idade média do grupo que passou foi de 24,14 h (± 10,21) e a do grupo que falhou 19,19 horas (±8,43). Possuíam menos de 24 horas de vida no momento do teste 66,12% dos RN, foi constatado vérnix obliterante em 4.9%. CONLUSÃO: face a alta precoce hospitalar, é necessário que o Fonoaudiólogo realize o teste antes das 48 horas de vida do RN. Desta forma, além das causas biológicas inerentes a faixa etária, detectou-se um problema estrutural de administração hospitalar, que independe da habilidade ou experiência do Fonoaudiólogo. A Manobra Facilitadora é altamente recomendada.

Etiology and one-year follow-up results of hearing loss identified by screening of newborn hearing in Japan

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of newborn hearing loss in a Japanese population and to elucidate etiological factors and one-year prognosis.

Study Design: Screening of newborn hearing.

Setting: Children's tertiary referral center.

Subjects and Methods: Between 1999 and 2008, 101,912 newborn infants were screened, with 693 infants (0.68%) referred. Etiology investigation included CT, detection of cytomegalovirus (CMV) DNA, and connexin 26 mutation.

Results: Abnormal results (auditory brainstem response [ABR] threshold ≥ 35 normal hearing level [dB nHL] in either side) were observed in 312 infants (0.31%), and 133 subjects (0.13%) with ABR thresholds ≥ 50 dB nHL on both sides were classified into the habilitation group. In this group, inner ear/internal auditory meatus anomalies were detected in 20 of 121 subjects (17%) tested, middle/external ear anomalies in 14 of 121 subjects (12%), CMV DNA in 13 of 77 subjects (17%), and connexin 26 mutation in 28 of 89 subjects (31%). In 68 subjects undergoing all three investigations (CT, CMV, and connexin 26), 41 (60%) had positive results in at least one test. With inclusion of otitis media with effusion and perinatal problems, this rate amounted to 78% (53 subjects). Of the 97 infants in the habilitation group successfully followed up to one year, 36 (37%) showed a threshold change of 20 dB or more in either ear: 11 (11%) progression and 25 (26%) improvement, and 15 infants (15%) were reclassified into a less severe classification.

Conclusion: Considering that 26 percent of infants with bilateral moderate to severe hearing loss showed improvement in one year, habilitation protocols, especially very early cochlear implantation within one year of birth, should be reconsidered.

[Universal newborn hearing screening. Methodical aspects]

BACKGROUND

In order to prepare for the introduction of a universal newborn hearing screening program on a larger scale, TEOAE and ABR were recorded on automated screening instruments from both ears of 501 newborns at the University Hospital Heidelberg over a period of 13 months. The parents of children in whom OAE and ABR could not be detected in both ears, were requested to allow a complete exploration of the auditory status of the children at the department of pediatric audiology.

SUBJECTS AND METHODS

Internally available data networks were used for the acquisition and evaluation of data and for the organization of tracking and follow-up. Of the children 35% exhibited risk factors for congenital hearing impairment.

RESULTS

The pass rate was 98.7% for the exclusion of binaural and 91.6% for monaural hearing disorders (TEOAE or ABR detectable). On the basis of the data it can be shown how pass rates can be optimized by selecting a suitable moment for the examination and by prescribing a minimum number of test repetitions (3 for TEOAE and 2 for AABR).

CONCLUSION

Quality control of screening programs should include these parameters and, in particular the number of repetitions of test measurements in all screening steps.

[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.

Ligurian experience on neonatal hearing screening: clinical and epidemiological aspects

AIM

Early identification and rehabilitation of newborns with congenital hearing impairment (HI) by Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening (UNHS).

METHODS

The neonatal population was divided into two groups: babies with No Audiological Risk (NAR), and babies With Audiological Risk (WAR). NAR neonates underwent OAE testing, and in case of a doubtful (Refer) result, ABR testing was carried out. All WAR newborns underwent ABR testing within the third month of life.

RESULTS

Between February 1, 2002 and December 31, 2004, UNHS was carried out on 32 502 newborns at the 13 regional birth centres, representing 98.7% of the whole regional neonatal population. The prevalence of HI in the population we tested was estimated at about 1 per thousand, while Bilateral Hearing Impairment (BHI) was estimated at 0.65 per thousand. A 3.7% prevalence of HI and a 2.8% prevalence of BHI was observed among the WAR population. Median age at the end of the diagnostic procedures was 6.7 months in the WAR population and 6.9 months in the NAR population.

CONCLUSIONS

Our project is based on two levels of testing, which resulted in a 0.28% false-positive rate with 100% sensitivity and 99% specificity. Our screening is the first Italian experience that has been extended to a whole region and the results prove that regional neonatal hearing screening is feasible.

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.

Reliability of hearing screening in high-risk neonates: Comparative study of otoacoustic emission, automated and conventional auditory brainstem response

OBJECTIVE

To compare the diagnostic reliability of automated transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (a-TEOAE), automated auditory brainstem response (a-ABR) and conventional brainstem auditory evoked potential (BAEP/ABR) for identification of hearing loss in high-risk neonates.

METHODS

Two hundred and six neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) admitted neonates were tested pre-discharge. Follow-up included a-TEOAE in all children, repetition of a-ABR or BAEP if failed in NICU. Sensitivity and specificity were compared and correlated with auditory risk factors.

RESULTS

BAEP had the highest sensitivity (100%) and specificity (90.8%), a-ABR the lowest (88.9% and 70.6%). A statistically significant difference in risk factors for temporary hearing loss was observed between normal and false positive a-TEOAE and BAEP, but not a-ABR outcome. Differences in specificity between a-ABR and a-TEOAE explain the pattern of "absent a-ABR/present a-TEOAE" in 13.8% of ears.

CONCLUSIONS

The BAEP appears the more reliable test for hearing screening of high-risk neonates because of highest sensitivity and specificity and should be used to confirm the diagnosis of "auditory neuropathy" in high-risk neonates. The reliability of a-ABR devices in critically ill neonates needs further investigation.

SIGNIFICANCE

This is, to our knowledge, the first attempt to compare the diagnostic reliability of a-TEOAE, a-ABR and BAEP in high-risk neonates.

Effects of Maturation on Parameters Used for Pass/Fail Criteria in Neonatal Hearing Screening Programmes Using Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions

We aimed to investigate the incidence of false alarms that occurred with the pass/fail criteria used in a published series of neonatal hearing screening programmes, as a function of age. We analysed the database of 19137 normally hearing babies (38274 ears) tested in the Wessex Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Project. Otoacoustic emissions were recorded prior to discharge from maternity units, using IL088 equipment. We assessed the pass/fail rate using the Wessex criteria and 10 other pass/fail criteria published in the literature. Using Pearson's correlation coefficient, a statistically significant correlation between signal-to-noise ratio at each of the frequency bands 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 kHz and babies' age in hours at the 0.01 level was identified. The correlation was also significant (0.01 level) between age and frequency reproducibility in each of the bands at 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 kHz as well as the whole reproducibility. The number of false alarms reduced significantly after the first 24 h of life with all the criteria examined. We conclude that in the first hours after birth due to insufficient maturation of the otoacoustic emission, there is a high rate of false alarms. This increase in the false alarm rate, whilst dependent on the criteria used, occurs with all criteria. This leads to the consideration of whether the establishment of age-dependent pass/fail criteria could reduce the false alarm rate and the subsequent strain on diagnostic centres.

Brainstem auditory evoked response in neonatal neurology

Over the last three decades, the brainstem auditory evoked response (BAER) has been used to assess functional integrity and development of the auditory system and the brain in conditions that affect the brainstem auditory pathway. As a non-invasive objective test, BAER is particularly suitable in very young or sick infants. It is the major tool to detect hearing impairment in high-risk infants, and a component in universal hearing screening. BAER is also a valuable adjunct to detect neurological impairment in many developmental disorders and functional abnormalities in a range of neurological diseases. The maximum length sequence (MLS) technique has recently been incorporated into neonatal BAER study. Recent results indicate that the MLS has the potential to improve the diagnostic value of BAER in some clinical situations, although the wider utility of this relative new technique remains to be further explored.

Success rate of newborn and follow-up screening of hearing using otoacoustic emissions

OBJECTIVE

During the last 6 years, and after a long period of pilot study, a universal newborn hearing screening program based on otoacoustic emissions is implemented in Iaso Maternity Hospital. Our purpose is to present the success rate of otoacoustic emission testing on discharge from the hospital and 1 month later.

METHODS

All full-term newborns who were screened during a period of 2 years and failed testing after one or more sessions of transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions, on discharge from the hospital, were included in the study. These newborns were retested approximately 1 month after discharge.

RESULTS

Twenty-five thousand and thirty-two newborns were examined in total. We found 534 (2.1%) 'refer' cases. Only 223 of them (41.8%) returned to retest in follow-up after 1 month. From the rescreening, 59 (2.3 per thousand) newborns failed in the test again and were referred for diagnostic audiological evaluation.

CONCLUSIONS

The rate of referrals was small, but efforts should be made to decrease it further. The final number of 'failures' found, approaches the expected rate of definitely diagnosed deafness reported from other settings. The main problem we have still to confront is the high missed to-follow-up rate.