Universal neonatal hearing screening program in Shanghai, China: An inter-regional and international comparison

Fang, X. M.; Li, Xi; Zhang, Qi; Wan, Jin; Sun, Mei; Chang, Fengshui; Lü, Jun; Chen, Gang

doi:10.1016/j.ijporl.2016.08.022

Cited by 6 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 34 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, they did not make comparisons with a gold standard assessor. Several studies have described the role of ‘non‐specialist health workers’, such as nurses, in newborn hearing screening programmes, however, none to date have made comparisons in the accuracy of this screening compared to a gold standard tester . The Joint Position Statement on Infant Hearing (2007), asserts that screening technologies that are automated are necessary to eliminate individual test interpretation, reduce effects of tester error on test outcome.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy of non‐specialist versus specialist health workers in diagnosing hearing loss and ear disease in Malawi

Bright

Mulwafu

Phiri

et al. 2019

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective To determine whether a non‐specialist health worker can accurately undertake audiometry and otoscopy, the essential clinical examinations in a survey of hearing loss, instead of a highly skilled specialist (i.e. ENT or audiologist). Methods A clinic‐based diagnostic accuracy study was conducted in Malawi. Consecutively sampled participants ≥ 18 years had their hearing tested using a validated tablet‐based audiometer (hearTest) by an audiologist (gold standard), an audiology officer, a nurse and a community health worker (CHW). Otoscopy for diagnosis of ear pathologies was conducted by an ENT specialist (gold standard), an ENT clinical officer, a CHW, an ENT nurse and a general nurse. Sensitivity, specificity and kappa (κ) were calculated. 80% sensitivity, 70% specificity and kappa of 0.6 were considered adequate. Results Six hundred and seventeen participants were included. High sensitivity (>90%) and specificity (>85%) in detecting bilateral hearing loss was obtained by all non‐specialists. For otoscopy, sensitivity and specificity were >80% for all non‐specialists in diagnosing any pathology except for the ENT nurse. Agreement in diagnoses for the ENT clinical officer was good (κ = 0.7) in both ears. For other assessors, moderate agreement was found (κ = 0.5). Conclusion A non‐specialist can be trained to accurately assess hearing using mobile‐based audiometry. However, accurate diagnosis of ear conditions requires at least an ENT clinical officer (or equivalent). Conducting surveys of hearing loss with non‐specialists could lower costs and increase data collection, particularly in low‐ and middle‐income countries, where ENT specialists are scarce.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Diagnostic accuracy of non‐specialist versus specialist health workers in diagnosing hearing loss and ear disease in Malawi

Bright

Mulwafu

Phiri

et al. 2019

Tropical Med Int Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Since 2000, the Chinese central government has developed various regulations, national plans, guidelines, and technical criteria for a universal NHS program. However, implementation of the program was at the discretion of provincial or local governments, which vary significantly in their economic development and available resources to implement these programs [7]. Guangdong is the most populous province in China, with a population of 107,240,000 residents [8].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Newborn Screening for Congenital Hearing Impairment: A 17-Year Experience for Improving Quality of Healthcare

2024

J Community Med Public Health

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background:To improve healthcare quality, a preventive intervention system has been developed globally with routine newborn screening, diagnosis, intervention, and rehabilitation for congenital hearing impairment. An intervention program with Newborn Hearing Screening (NHS) was implemented in Guangdong Province, China, in 1999, along with molecular screening for common inherited deafness mutations since 2011. Methods: We evaluated the clinical screening data for congenital hearing impairment and the results of genetic testing for deafness genes that were collected by the Guangdong provincial administrative agencies and stored in the provincial healthcare intervention system. Results: NHS rates varied from <30% in eastern Guangdong to >95% in the provincial capitol. This difference in rates correlated primarily with the regional per capita Gross Domestic Product (GDP; R 2 =0.69, p<.001) and the average maternal hospitalization days (R 2 =0.11, p=.01). The province-wide screening rate increased from 30.0% in 2008 to 80.58% in 2016. Combined screening for hearing and deafness genes was conducted in several hospitals in developed regions. The total mutation rate of hearing and deafness genes ranged from 3.08% to 4.5%, with GJB2 235 del C being the most frequently encountered mutation. Three hospitals conducted genetic screening of pregnant women for hearing and deafness genes, and the rate of mutation carrier ranged from 3.16% to 4.17%. Conclusion: To further improve healthcare quality, hospitals are recommended to implement hearing screening and diagnostic procedures, networking platforms, genetic diagnostic testing, and genetic counseling services. Furthermore, there is an urgent need for more referral molecular testing laboratories to perform molecular diagnosis of hearing loss.

show abstract

“…14,15 Despite this, the 2018 newborn hearing screening registry shows only 33,127 infants (1.96%) screened out of 1,668,120 live births. 16 Fang et al explored factors in successfully implementing the universal newborn hearing screening program, including a mandatory newborn hearing screening policy, low to no intervention cost, system design, decision making, funding, and a concrete implementation plan. 17 Routine linkage with health insurance and tracking systems were also found to improve follow-up for detection of bilateral hearing loss.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Implementation of Newborn Hearing Screening in Rizal, Philippines, and Northern California: Lessons Learned

2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective. The universal newborn hearing screening program has been implemented in the Philippines for the past ten years. However, screening rates in the country are still low. The current study aimed to describe the universal newborn hearing screening program (UNHSP) delivery system in Rizal, Philippines, and Northern California. Methods.The study utilized a case study research design using data triangulation of FGD, KII, and document review to characterize and compare the implementation of the Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Program in Rizal Province and Northern California.Results. Several differences were found in the protocols for newborn hearing screening in Rizal, Philippines, and Northern California, including centralization of the program, availability of surveillance data, screening protocols, and tracking system. Conclusion.There is an immense need to disseminate universal newborn hearing screening among healthcare practitioners and create a system to monitor and evaluate real-time data.

show abstract

Universal neonatal hearing screening program in Shanghai, China: An inter-regional and international comparison

Cited by 6 publications

References 34 publications

Diagnostic accuracy of non‐specialist versus specialist health workers in diagnosing hearing loss and ear disease in Malawi

Diagnostic accuracy of non‐specialist versus specialist health workers in diagnosing hearing loss and ear disease in Malawi

Newborn Screening for Congenital Hearing Impairment: A 17-Year Experience for Improving Quality of Healthcare

Implementation of Newborn Hearing Screening in Rizal, Philippines, and Northern California: Lessons Learned

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About