Polish Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Program—4-year experience (2003–2006)

Interdisciplinary approach to design, performance, and quality management in a multicenter newborn hearing screening project

“…We met this requirement in Hamburg (3.3%). Other published surveys show unilateral and bilateral fail rates between 2% and 7% [4,20,34,49,64,67,69,71]. Critics of UNHS argue that high rates of false-positive findings result in unnecessary parental anxiety.…”

“…Furthermore, we intend to draw some comparisons with newborn hearing screening data of other European countries. However, the variety of countries (national: Poland, Netherlands, Flanders...) or regions (regional: Hamburg...) with different structures of the health care system (exemplary health care system in Sweden [37] and Flanders (personal communication)), different socioeconomic factors, cultural aspects, different programs (screening excluding unilateral and mild hearing loss [69], targeted screening well baby screening [31]), and different screening procedures [31,64,68]; makes direct comparison between their screening programmes difficult (see also Table 1 [15]). …”

On the threshold of effective well infant nursery hearing screening in Western Sicily

“…After the first stage screening in fact, our overall referral rate was 3.64% with a percentage value of false positives of only 3.34%; therefore we obtained, just with the first step, lower value than the most TEOAE based screening programmes from other countries such as Malaysia (12%), South Africa (11.1%), Oman (11%), Pakistan (10.2%) and Polonia (4.4%) maintaining a good coverage percentage [7,14,25,26,29]. The specificity value after first step screening was 96.7 AE 1.6% and, this percentage increased to 98.78 AE 0.3% after the second stage screening with a total number of 51 referred, 41 of which false positives (1.21%) ( Table 2).…”

“…Among the hearing screening methods, the choice of the TEOAEs is a simple, quick, effective, non-invasive method and need using non-specialists without prior audiological experience [7,8]. Even if TEOAE tests are generally thought to be easier to administer, their main limit is represented by the referral rate that range from 6% to 12% for the first screening [9][10][11].…”

Newborn hearing screening results in an inner part of Aegean region

“…In the international literature, incidence of congenital hearing loss changes between 0.13 and 0.60%. [13,20,21] In national literature, incidences of hearing loss among newborns differed widely (Kayiran et al, 0.22% of 8052 newborns; [22] Genc et al, 0.2 in 5485 newborns; [23] Tatli et al, 0.28 in 711 newborns [24] and Kucur et al, 0.15 in 11053 newborns. [25] ).…”