Background: Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHC) is the gold standard toward early hearing detection and intervention, hence the importance of its deliberation within the South African context.Aim: To determine the feasibility of screening in low-risk neonates, using Otoacoustic Emissions (OAEs), within the Midwife Obstetric Unit (MOU) three-day assessment clinic at a Community Health Centre (CHC), at various test times following birth.Method: Within a quantitative, prospective design, 272 neonates were included. Case history interviews, otoscopic examinations and Distortion Product OAEs (DPOAEs) screening were conducted at two sessions (within six hours and approximately three days after birth). Data were analysed via descriptive statistics.Results: Based on current staffing profile and practice, efficient and comprehensive screening is not successful within hours of birth, but is more so at the MOU three-day assessment clinic. Significantly higher numbers of infants were screened at session 2, with significantly less false-positive results. At session 1, only 38.1% of the neonates were screened, as opposed to more than 100% at session 2. Session 1 yielded an 82.1% rate of false positive findings, a rate that not only has important implications for the emotional well-being of the parents; but also for resource-stricken environments where expenditure has to be accounted for carefully.Conclusion: Current findings highlight the importance of studying methodologies to ensure effective reach for hearing screening within the South African context. These findings argue for UNHS initiatives to include the MOU three-day assessment to ensure that a higher number of neonates are reached and confounding variables such as vernix have been eliminated.

Purpose: To explore the feasibility of infant hearing screening from a developing country context. Methods: A descriptive research design was employed, using a combination of surveys, questionnaires and face-to-face semi-structured interviews; as well as conduction of audiological measures such as otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) and automated auditory brainstem responses (AABR) during hearing screening. Participants comprised low–risk neonates, high-risk neonates and primary health care nursing managers. Results: Findings indicated that (1) screening at the Midwife Obstetric Unit 3-day assessment clinic may be more practical; (2) screening at primary health care clinics is not feasible until the identified barriers are addressed and; (3) factors such as ambient noise levels, availability of space for screening and time of discharge influence the practicability and efficiency of screening within a hospital context. Conclusion: There are a number of factors which influence the practicability and efficiency of newborn hearing screening. Each of these factors may vary depending on the level of healthcare setting and may either facilitate or act as barriers toward the implementation of newborn hearing screening in the South African context.