Purpose: to analyze the evasion rate of the Newborn Hearing Screening program’s retest, to verify whether the presence of risk indicators for hearing loss influences it, and to describe which risk indicators for hearing loss occur more frequently in these cases. Methods: 1,287 newborns/infants participated, who were screened between June 2015 and June 2018. All of them obtained "fail" as the Newborn Hearing Screening result, were referred to the retest and did not attend it. Information related to the occurrence of risk indicators for hearing loss was observed. Results: the study found that the evasion rate was of 15.23%. The presence of risk indicators for hearing loss did not show an association with non-attendance at this stage of the program (p-value = 0.087). The most frequent indicators in the cases of non-attendance at the retest were: ototoxic medication use and intensive care unit stay for more than five days. Conclusion: high evasion rate of the retest has been observed. It has been found that the presence of risk indicators did not influence the retest evasion rate. Use of ototoxic medication and stay at the intensive care unit were the most frequent indicators among those who did not attend the retest.

Purpose To describe the audiological characteristics and the type of intervention chosen on unilateral hearing loss cases in children and adolescents as well as to analyze correlations between the degree of hearing loss, the indication and the use of electronic devices. Methods Observational, descriptive and retrospective study, carried out with information of 34 medical records from children and adolescents with unilateral hearing loss, assessed by two auditory rehabilitation services of medium complexity, throughout 2016 to 2019. Descriptive and Inferential statistical analysis were performed with the data. Results A predominance of profound sensorineural unilateral hearing loss in the right ear, of pre-lingual character, with 20.6% of malformations. The most adopted intervention was the hearing aid indication, although its use is low, regardless of the degree of the hearing loss. An association was found between the degree of the hearing loss and the healthcare professionals in indicating the use of the devices. Conclusion The indication of hearing aids is the most frequent and this decision is influenced by the degree of the hearing loss, in which the devices are mostly indicated for mild to severe losses, with bigger divergence of conduct for profound hearing losses.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract