Follow-up in newborn hearing screening – A systematic review

Ravi, Rohit; Gunjawate, Dhanshree R.; Yerraguntla, Krishna; Lewis, Leslie Edward; Driscoll, Carlie; Rajashekhar, Bellur

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.08.016

Cited by 76 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…In 37.9% of the newborns, an intervention by the screening center was conducted to assure the control of a failed screening or control test. Other countries or regions without a tracking system have to deal with lost-to-follow-up rates of up to 60% [ 25 , 26 , 27 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Newborn Hearing Screening in Bavaria—Is It Possible to Reach the Quality Parameters?

Brockow¹,

Söhl²,

Nennstiel³

2018

IJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since the 1 January, 2009, newborn hearing screening (NHS) has been obligatory for every child in Germany. NHS is part of the Pediatrics Directive of the Federal Joint Committee. In this directive, details of the procedures and screening quality to be achieved are given. We evaluate if these quality criteria were met in Bavaria in 2016. The NHS data of children born in 2016 in Bavaria were evaluated for quality criteria, such as screening coverage in screening facilities, screening methods, referral rate (rate of failed tests at discharge) and a child’s age at the diagnosis of a hearing disorder. NHS was documented for 116,776 children born in Bavaria in 2016. In the first step, 78,904 newborns were screened with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions and 37,865 with automated auditory brainstem response. Of these, 9182 (7.8%) failed the first test in one or both ears. A second screening before discharge was performed on 53.3% of the newborns with a refer result in the first test, out of which 58.7% received a pass result. After the screening process, 4.6% of the newborns were discharged with a refer result. Only 18% of the first controls after discharge were performed by a pediatric audiologist. In 37.9% of the newborns, the screening center intervened to assure the control of any failed screening test. The median age of diagnosis for bilateral hearing loss was 5.3 months. In Bavaria, NHS was implemented successfully. A tracking system for all children who failed the hearing screening test is pivotal for early diagnosis and therapy of children with hearing deficiency.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Newborn Hearing Screening in Bavaria—Is It Possible to Reach the Quality Parameters?

Brockow¹,

Söhl²,

Nennstiel³

2018

IJNS

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In a systemic review of 53 articles, the average dropout rate which is loss to follow up after screening test was 20% in single-center studies and 21% in multiple-center studies. Reasons of a high dropout rate were the educational disparity, lack of adequate knowledge of parents, and lack of an adequate data management system which is the most important strategy to decrease PLOS ONE the dropout rates during follow-up period after screening [21]. If we consider infants who are not included in the documented diagnostic ABR conducting rate, the number of hearingimpaired infants may be higher than reported data.…”

Section: Plos Onementioning

confidence: 98%

Comparison of newborn hearing screening results between well babies and neonates admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit for more than 5 days: Analysis based on the national database in Korea for 9 years

Chang

Park

2020

PLoS ONE

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this cohort study is to compare newborn hearing screening (NHS) results between healthy newborns and neonates who were admitted to the neonate intensive care unit (NICU) for more than 5 days based on the national database for 9 years. Ultimately, we've tried to analyze the associated factors necessary to manage the national NHS program according to the group, which would help to establish policy to effectively detect and support hearing impaired children and which would help to control qualities. Methods The Ministry of Health and Welfare (MHW) introduced a nationwide coupon-mediated program for the low-income class since 2009. The coupon consisted of two parts, the screening part and the confirming parts with the same unique number, and the MHW supported the cost of one screening test and one diagnostic auditory brainstem response (ABR) test for infants who did not pass from the screening test. We have analyzed the screening test performing rate, the referral rate according to the screening methods or institutions, the prevalence of hearing loss, and the average age of hearing loss diagnosis. Hearing loss was defined as any hearing impairment either unilateral or bilateral with the hearing threshold � 40 dB nHL on the diagnostic ABR test, irrespective of its etiology. Results A total of 524,371 newborns were enrolled in the study, and 506,634 (96.6%) neonates were in the "well-baby group (WBG)", while 17,737 (3.4%) were in the "high-risk group (HRG)". The referral rate of the screening test was 1.5% in average, 1.3% in the WBG, and 7.5% in the HRG. The referral rates varied according to the screening methods and

show abstract

“…22,36–38 A recent systematic review involving reports from multiple countries assessed barriers to follow-up after newborn hearing screening and found that educational disparities, travel distance, work constraints, unfavorable attitudes, and competing healthcare needs were the primary reasons for non-adherence. 39 Families of children with hearing loss report that they lack confidence and resources needed for healthcare decision-making for their child. 40 Many parents lack role models who have been through the complex process of hearing loss diagnosis and intervention 41 because more than 90% of deaf children have hearing parents.…”

Section: Barriers To Pediatric Hearing Healthcare Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Proposed methods for improving loss to follow-up for diagnostic testing in many countries throughout the world include the use of a database management system, increased parental education, telephone reminders, multidisciplinary team management, and flexibility in appointment scheduling. 39 There are also advances in screening for causes of pediatric hearing loss, such as cCMV. Screening for cCMV is typically completed within the first 3 weeks after birth and evidence of cCMV positivity can promote timely infant hearing testing after screening.…”

Section: Innovations In Pediatric Hearing Healthcare Deliverymentioning

confidence: 99%

Disparities in access to pediatric hearing health care

Bush

Kaufman²,

McNulty³

2017

Current Opinion in Otolaryngology &Amp; Head &Amp; Neck Surgery

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose of Review There are significant disparities in care facing children with hearing loss. The objective of this review is to assess the current disparities in pediatric hearing healthcare delivery, describe the barriers of efficient and effective pediatric hearing healthcare, and explore the innovations to improve pediatric hearing healthcare delivery. Recent findings Children with hearing loss from certain geographic regions or ethnic background are significantly delayed in diagnosis and treatment. Multiple patient characteristics (presentation of hearing loss), parental factors (insurance status, socioeconomic status, educational status, and travel distance to providers), and provider barriers (specialist shortage and primary care provider challenges) prevent the delivery of timely hearing healthcare. Advances such as improved screening programs and the expansion of care through remote services may help to ameliorate these disparities. Summary Timely identification and treatment of pediatric hearing loss is critical to prevent lifelong language complications. Children from vulnerable populations, such as rural residents, face significant disparities in care. Careful assessment of these barriers and implementation of culturally-acceptable interventions are paramount to maximize communication outcomes of children with hearing loss.

show abstract

Follow-up in newborn hearing screening – A systematic review

Abstract: This review is a novel attempt to explore the LTF among NHS studies, reasons for LTF and strategies to reduce LTF. This review can act as a basis for planning and execution of effective NHS programs.

Cited by 76 publications

References 62 publications

Newborn Hearing Screening in Bavaria—Is It Possible to Reach the Quality Parameters?

Newborn Hearing Screening in Bavaria—Is It Possible to Reach the Quality Parameters?

Comparison of newborn hearing screening results between well babies and neonates admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit for more than 5 days: Analysis based on the national database in Korea for 9 years

Disparities in access to pediatric hearing health care

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About