Neonatal hearing screening

Oudesluys‐Murphy, Anne Marie; Straaten, H.L.M. van; Bholasingh, R.; Zanten, G. A. Van

doi:10.1007/bf01955176

“…The method employed in the present study had a sensitivity of 98 to 100% and high specificity, 97%, [13][14][15] so that the prevalence of failure in the neonatal hearing screening test must be understood as possible hearing loss, and false negatives may be linked with incomplete myelinization in the studied age group. The diagnosis must be confirmed with the conventional ABR, considering the maturation of the Central Nervous System.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Triagem auditiva em recém-nascidos internados em UTI neonatal

Lima¹,

Marba²,

Santos³

2006

J. Pediatr. (Rio J.)

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Investigate the prevalence of hearing impairment in newborns hospitalized at the Intensive and Intermediate Care Unit at the Women s Comprehensive Health Center Neonatology Service (UNICAMP) and associated risk factors.Methods: 979 newborn babies were assessed between January 2000 and January 2003, through automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) (ALGO 2e color screener). The result was considered normal when the newborn showed response to a 35dBNA signal bilaterally. The prevalence of AABR impairment and the odds ratio were analyzed with a 95% confidence interval using bivariate analysis. To identify the independent risk factors for hearing alterations, multivariate analyses were used with logistic regression.Results: The prevalence of AABR impairment was 10.2%, of which 5.3% was unilateral and 4.9% bilateral. From the multivariate analyses, the following observations were made: family history of congenital hearing loss (OR = 5.192; p = 0.016), craniofacial deformity (OR = 5.530; p < 0.001), genetic syndromes associated with hearing loss (OR = 4.212; p < 0.001), weight below 1,000 g (OR = 3.230; p < 0.001), asphyxia (OR = 3.532; p < 0.001), hyperbilirubinemia (OR = 4.099; p = 0.002) and use of mechanical ventilation (OR = 1.826; p < 0.031) were the indicators that best characterized the group at risk for hearing impairment. Conclusions:The prevalence of hearing impairment using AABR is high. Therefore, it is essential for all newborns who present isolated or associated risk factors to undergo hearing screening in situations in which it is not possible to have universal hearing screening.

show abstract

“…O método utilizado neste trabalho, a AABR com aparelho ALGO 2e Natus, representa uma simplificação da ABR convencional, que incorpora a detecção da resposta automaticamente e compara com um modelo normal, obtido de uma grande amostra populacional de recém-nascidos; portanto, não necessita da interpretação do examinador. Esse método tem apresentado sensibilidade de 98 a 100% e alta especificidade (97%) [13][14][15] , de tal forma que a prevalência de falha na triagem auditiva neonatal deve ser entendida como possível perda auditiva, e falso-negativos podem estar ligados ao processo de mielinização ainda incompleto, na faixa etária estudada. O diagnóstico deve ser confirmado com o ABR convencional, considerando-se a maturação do sistema nervoso central 16 .…”

Section: Discussionunclassified

Hearing screening in a neonatal intensive care unit

Lima

¹

,

Marba

²

,

Santos

³

2006

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective: Investigate the prevalence of hearing impairment in newborns hospitalized at the Intensive and Intermediate Care Unit at the Womens Comprehensive Health Center Neonatology Service (UNICAMP) and associated risk factors.Methods: 979 newborn babies were assessed between January 2000 and January 2003, through automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) (ALGO 2e color screener). The result was considered normal when the newborn showed response to a 35dBNA signal bilaterally. The prevalence of AABR impairment and the odds ratio were analyzed with a 95% confidence interval using bivariate analysis. To identify the independent risk factors for hearing alterations, multivariate analyses were used with logistic regression.Results: The prevalence of AABR impairment was 10.2%, of which 5.3% was unilateral and 4.9% bilateral. From the multivariate analyses, the following observations were made: family history of congenital hearing loss (OR = 5.192; p = 0.016), craniofacial deformity (OR = 5.530; p < 0.001), genetic syndromes associated with hearing loss (OR = 4.212; p < 0.001), weight below 1,000 g (OR = 3.230; p < 0.001), asphyxia (OR = 3.532; p < 0.001), hyperbilirubinemia (OR = 4.099; p = 0.002) and use of mechanical ventilation (OR = 1.826; p < 0.031) were the indicators that best characterized the group at risk for hearing impairment. Conclusions:The prevalence of hearing impairment using AABR is high. Therefore, it is essential for all newborns who present isolated or associated risk factors to undergo hearing screening in situations in which it is not possible to have universal hearing screening.J Pediatr (Rio J). 2006;82(2):110-4: Newborn, diagnosis, hearing loss. ResumoObjetivo: Avaliar a prevalência de alterações auditivas em recém-nascidos internados na unidade de terapia intensiva e cuidados intermediários do serviço de neonatologia do Centro de Assistência Integral à Saúde da Mulher, Faculdade de Ciências Médicas, Universidade Estadual de Campinas, e analisar os fatores de risco associados.Métodos: Foram avaliados 979 recém-nascidos no período de janeiro de 2000 a janeiro de 2003, utilizando-se a audiometria automá-tica de tronco encefálico (AABR), com aparelho ALGO-2e color -Natus. O resultado foi considerado normal quando o recém-nascido apresentou resposta para 35 dBNA bilateralmente. Foi analisada a prevalência de AABR alterada e odds ratio com intervalo de confiança de 95% em análise bivariada. Para identificar os fatores de risco independentes para AABR alterada, foi feita análise múltipla com modelo de regressão logística.Resultados: A prevalência de alteração no AABR foi de 10,2%, sendo 5,3% unilateral e 4,9% bilateral. Pela análise multivariada, observamos que: antecedente familiar (OR = 5,192; p = 0,016), malformação craniofacial (OR = 5,530; p < 0,001), síndrome genética (OR = 4,212; p < 0,001), peso menor que 1.000 g (OR = 3,230; p < 0,001), asfixia (OR = 3,532; p < 0,001), hiperbilirrubinemia (OR = 4,099; p = 0,002) e uso de ventilação mecânica (OR = 1,826; p < 0,031) foram os in...

show abstract

“…Click-evoked ABR is highly correlated with hearing sensitivity in the frequency range from 1000-4000 Hz. AABRs test for the presence or absence of wave V. No operator interpretation is required (Oudesluys-Murphy et al, 1996).…”

Section: Screening Of Hearing In Newbornsmentioning

confidence: 99%