听力筛查未通过婴幼儿客观听力评估与特征分析

目的分析听力筛查未通过婴幼儿的干扰因素及临床听力学特征。方法选取2004年8月—2006年1月广州市及周边地区妇幼保健院系统出生并行耳声发射（otoacoustic emissions，OAE）新生儿听力筛查，因二次听力筛查未通过转诊本院的患儿，月龄2～6个月，共166例（315耳）。详细询问并登记病史，按其首次听力评估时的月龄分为2～3个月组和4～6个月组，行听性脑干反应（auditory brainstem response，ABR）、畸变产物耳声发射（distortion product otoacoustic emissions，DPOAE）、鼓室声导抗和镫骨肌反射等客观听力测试。首次听力评估异常者，建议1～3个月后（以不超过6个月龄为限）进行第二次听力评估，比较前后两次ABR、DPOAE、鼓室声导抗曲线和静态声顺值的转归情况，并确定诊断。结果①166例听力筛查未通过婴幼儿中，有新生儿高胆红素血症史者比例最高（34例，20．5％）；其次为有新生儿窒息史（10例，6．0％）。②4～6个月组鼓室声导抗B型曲线的比例（13例，17耳，17．9％）高于2～3个月组（11例，14耳，8．0％），X。=26．22，P〈0．01。③4～6个月组ABR正常的比例（24例，29耳，37．2％）明显高于2～3个月组（34例，45耳，23．4％），x。=5．27，P〈0．05；在有两次评估记录的受试者中（24例，45耳），第二次ABR测试结果较第一次测试结果好转的比例为56．0％（11例，14耳）。（砚～6个月组DPOAE正常的比例（19例，31耳，39．7％）略低于2～3个月组（50例，81耳，42．2％），X。=0．14，P〉0．05；在有两次评估记录的受试者中（24例，45耳），第二次DPOAE测试结果较第一次好转的比例为32．0％（6例，8耳）。⑤166例听力筛查未通过受检者中，有4例（4耳）诊断为听神经病，均为单耳发病。结论在新生儿听力筛查未通过婴幼儿中，存在中耳因素对听力筛查结果和评估的影响，同时低月龄婴幼儿听觉神经系统存在发育完善的过程。对筛查和评估结果应作充分、恰当的解释，避免加重患儿家长的心理负担。

Hearing evaluation of infants failed in hearing screening

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the confusing factors and clinical and audiological characteristics in infants failed in hearing screening. METHODS: Between August 2004 and January 2006, 166 infants (315 ears) with detailed birth record and hearing screening record were reviewed in the study. The age of this series ranged from 2 to 6 months. They were born in maternal and child health hospitals (MCH) in Guangzhou city and surrounding areas, and had hearing screened by otoacoustic emissions (OAE). However, they failed in the first and second hearing screening. The birth history, high-risk factors of hearing-impaired during newborn period and pregnancy history of subjects were fully detailed. Subjects were classified according to the age: 2 to 3 months old infants were considered as group 1, while 4 to 6 months old infants were considered as group 2. Auditory brainstem response (ABR), distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAE) and acoustic immittance measurement were examined. Subjects with abnormal hearing-evaluation were retested during the following one to three months (before 6-month-old). The ABR results, DPOAE results and tympanic cavity pressure and static compliance value were compared between the two tests and then diagnosis was made. RESULTS: (1) Among the 166 cases, 34 (20.5%) cases were once suffered from hypercholesterolemia of newborn, and 10 cases (6.0%) had asphyxia and hypoxia history. (2) The proportion of presenting type B tympanogram in group 2 was higher than that of group 1 (chi2 = 26.22, P < 0.01). (3) The proportion of normal ABR in group 2 (37.2%) was significantly higher than that of in group 1 (23.4%, chi2 = 0.527, P < 0.05). Fifty-six percent of infants accepted twice ABR test had improving ABR results during the second test. (4) The proportion of normal DOPAE in group 2 (39.7%) was slightly lower than that of in group 1 (42.2%, chi2 = 0.14, P > 0.05). Among the infants who accepted twice DPOAE test, 32.0% had improving results in the second test. (5) Four cases (4 ears ) were diagnosed as auditory neuropathy. CONCLUSIONS: Middle ear function and development of auditory system in infants may be confusing factors in hearing screening. The results of hearing screening should be interpreted appropriately.