Population-based cross-sectional study to assess newborn hearing screening program in central Germany

Rißmann, Anke; Koehn, Andrea; Loderstedt, Marja; Schwemmle, C.; Goetze, Gerrit; Bartel, Susanne; Plontke, Stefan K.; Langer, Joerg; Begall, K.; Matulat, Peter; Roehl, Friedrich-Wilhelm; Vorwerk, Ulrich

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2018.01.035

Cited by 9 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 37 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The median age of diagnosis of a bilateral hearing disorder was 5.3 months (mean age 6.2 months, range 1-16). In our study, age was not corrected for preterm babies, which might be a reason for a higher age than in other studies [18,28]. A diagnosis before the 12th week of life, as required by the Pediatrics Directive, was achieved only in 23.9% of children.…”

Section: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 73%

“…After this first control test, only 21.2% of the children still had a refer result in one or both ears (overall referral rate 1.7%). Many other screening programs and some other regions in Germany have this first control performed by an ENT or pediatric specialist to further reduce the number of children with false positive results [ 12 , 17 , 28 ]. Children that again fail this first control should be referred to a pediatric audiologist immediately to ensure an early diagnosis.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

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: Discussioncontrasting

confidence: 73%

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

“…While the prevalence of IHL in HICs such as Germany [30] and the USA [31] is low, much higher prevalence has been reported in many LMICs as we found in our pilot program. For instance, studies in Cote d'Ivoire have reported a prevalence of 5.96/1000 [27], Jordan was 13.7/1000 [32], Nigeria was 28/1000 [5] and India (6.67/1000) [33].…”

Section: Plos Onecontrasting

confidence: 55%

Feasibility of establishing an infant hearing screening program and measuring hearing loss among infants at a regional referral hospital in south western Uganda

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction Despite the high burden of hearing loss (HL) globaly, most countries in resource limited settings lack infant hearing screening programs(IHS) for early HL detection. We examined the feasibility of establishing an IHS program in this setting, and in this pilot program measured the prevalence of infant hearing loss (IHL) and described the characteristics of the infants with HL. Methods We assessed feasibility of establishing an IHS program at a regional referral hospital in south-western Uganda. We recruited infants aged 1 day to 3 months and performed a three-staged screening. At stage 1, we used Transient Evoked Oto-acoustic Emissions (TEOAEs), at stage 2 we repeated TEOAEs for infants who failed TEOAEs at stage 1 and at stage 3, we conducted Automated brainstem responses(ABRs) for those who failed stage 2. IHL was present if they failed an ABR at 35dBHL. Results We screened 401 infants, mean age was 7.2 days (SD = 7.1). 74.6% (299 of 401) passed stage 1, the rest (25.4% or 102 of 401) were referred for stage 2. Of those referred (n = 102), only 34.3% (35 of 102) returned for stage 2 screening. About 14.3% (5/35) failed the repeat TEOAEs in at least one ear. At stage 3, 80% (4 of 5) failed the ABR screening in at least one ear, while 25% (n = 1) failed the test bilaterally. Among the 334 infants that completed the staged screening, the prevalence of IHL was 4/334 or 12 per 1000. Risk factors to IHL were Newborn Special Care Unit (NSCU) admission, gentamycin or oxygen therapy and prematurity. Conclusions IHS program establishment in a resource limited setting is feasible. Preliminary data indicate a high prevalence of IHL. Targeted screening of infants at high risk may be a more realistic and sustainable initial step towards establishing IHS program s in a developing country like Uganda.

show abstract

“…From the total number of 19,117 newborns 96.8% (18,510) were screened, which is less than in England (98.9%) or in central Germany (98.8%). However, in these countries the newborn hearing screening is organized centrally at the level of a national program, which is more effective (Rissmann et al, 2018;Szyfter et al, 2013;Wood et al, 2015). On the other hand, it is a higher number than the percentage stated by Sloot et al (Sloot et al, 2015).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 96%

Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening System: A 12-Year Single Centre Study in the Czech Republic

Blanař

Škvrňáková

Pellant

et al. 2021

Journal of Pediatric Nursing

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study aims to evaluate the number of examined newborns and the results of screening for twelve years (2008)(2009)(2010)(2011)(2012)(2013)(2014)(2015)(2016)(2017)(2018)(2019) and to assess the effectiveness of the established system of neonatal hearing screening. Design and methods: The study was designed as a retrospective longitudinal data analysis. The data included all the children (19,043) born in the hospital and also children (74) transferred from other healthcare facilities. A total of 19,117 children were included in the research group. Results: In the first three years, a higher number of children did not pass the hearing screening, which was followed by a declining trend in the following years. After the first year of screening ( 2008), there was an improvement in diagnosis linked with a decrease in false-positive screening results (from 9.4% to 6.4%; p = 0.002). From 2008 to 2015, the ratio of children with positive screening to those with negative screening had a steady or declining trend. Conclusions: The results showed a reduction in false-positive results after the first year of the screening program, probably due to improved care management and a gradual increase in the skills of the nurses performing the screening. Practice implications: The cornerstones of neonatal hearing screening are a sufficient number of trained neonatology nurses, their mutual substitutability and the availability of a hearing screening device in the newborn ward every day. The results imply the importance of periodic evaluation of the obtained data, enabling early detection of possible deficiencies in the hearing screening system.

show abstract

Population-based cross-sectional study to assess newborn hearing screening program in central Germany

Cited by 9 publications

References 37 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?

Feasibility of establishing an infant hearing screening program and measuring hearing loss among infants at a regional referral hospital in south western Uganda

Effectiveness of Neonatal Hearing Screening System: A 12-Year Single Centre Study in the Czech Republic

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About