The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: outpatient outcome measures

OBJECTIVE: To investigate outpatient outcome measures of a multi-center, state-wide, universal newborn hearing screening project. DESIGN: Eight hospitals participated in a 3-yr, funded project. Each hospital designed its own protocol using common criteria for judging whether an infant passed a hearing screening. Infants were tested in the hospital, and those either failing the in-hospital screening or who were not tested in the hospital (missed) were asked to return 4 to 6 wk after hospital discharge for outpatient rescreening. Those infants failing the outpatient rescreening were referred for diagnostic auditory brain stem response testing. Each hospital used its own audiological equipment and criteria to determine whether a particular infant had a hearing loss. All data were collected and analyzed for individual hospitals, as well as totaled across all hospitals. Data were analyzed in terms of year of program operation, nursery type, and geographic region. RESULTS: Seventy-two percent of infants who failed the in-hospital screening returned for outpatient testing. The percentage of in-hospital fails returning for retesting was significantly higher than the percentage of in-hospital misses returning for retesting. The percentage of infants returning for retesting increased with successive years of program operation. Some differences were noted in the percentage of infants returning for retesting among hospitals and geographic regions of the state. Some differences in outpatient outcome measures also were noted between infants originally born into the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) and the well-baby nursery (WBN). The percentage of infants from the NICU who returned for retesting was slightly higher than that for infants from the WBN. The percentage of infants from the WBN passing the outpatient rescreening was higher than that for the NICU infants. The overall prevalence of hearing loss was 1.96/1000, with that in the NICU being 8/1000 and that in the WBN being 0.9/1000. Positive predictive value for permanent hearing loss based on inpatient screening was approximately 4% and based on outpatient rescreening was approximately 22%. CONCLUSIONS: Several outpatient outcome measures changed with successive years of program operation, suggesting that programs improve over time. Also, some outpatient outcome measures differ between NICU and WBN populations. The differences noted across regions of the state in the percentage of infants returning for outpatient retesting require further research to determine whether differences are due to demographic and/or procedural differences.     

The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: introduction and overview

OBJECTIVE: To determine the feasibility of universal newborn hearing screening, including intervention of identified infants, in the state of New York. DESIGN: The New York State Department of Health issued a request for proposals that invited regional perinatal centers to apply for funding to implement universal newborn hearing screening. Hospitals were free to choose their own protocols but were to use physiologically based measures to screen infants for possible hearing loss. Criteria for passing the screening measures were common across sites. Infants failing the screening were to have diagnostic testing. Identified infants were to be followed by the state's Early Intervention Program and its associated Infant-Child Health Assessment Program. RESULTS: Seven regional perinatal centers (eight hospitals) representing the various regions of the state were funded for 3 yr to implement universal newborn hearing screening and follow-up of identified infants. Detailed data analysis was performed for inpatient, outpatient, and intervention outcome measures and for the various protocols. Most of the outcome measures were analyzed in terms of year of program operation, nursery type, and geographic region of the state. CONCLUSIONS: Universal newborn hearing screening was feasible in regional perinatal centers across the state of New York. The average ages of identification of hearing loss, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention were less than those reported in published studies where universal newborn hearing screening was not in place.     

The New York State universal newborn hearing screening demonstration project: ages of hearing loss identification, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention

OBJECTIVE: To determine the ages of hearing loss identification, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention through a multi-center, state-wide universal newborn hearing screening project. DESIGN: Universal newborn hearing screening was conducted at eight hospitals across New York State. All infants who did not bilaterally pass hearing screening before discharge were recalled for outpatient retesting. Inpatient screening and outpatient rescreening were done with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions and/or auditory brain stem response testing. Diagnostic testing was performed with age appropriate tests, auditory brain stem response and/or visual reinforcement audiometry. Infants diagnosed with permanent hearing loss were considered for hearing aids and early intervention. Ages of hearing loss identification, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention were investigated regarding nursery type, risk status, unilateral versus bilateral hearing loss, loss type, loss severity, and state regions. RESULTS: The prevalence of infants diagnosed with permanent hearing loss was 2.0/1000 (85 of 43,311). Of the 85 infants with hearing loss, 61% were from neonatal intensive care units (NICUs) and 67% were at risk for hearing loss. Of the 36 infants fitted with hearing aids, 58% were from NICUs and 78% were at risk for hearing loss. The median age at identification and enrollment in early intervention was 3 mo. Median age at hearing aid fitting was 7.5 mo. Median ages at identification were less for infants from the well-baby nurseries (WBNs) than for the NICU infants and for infants with severe/profound than for infants with mild/moderate hearing loss, but were similar for not-at-risk and at-risk infants. Median ages at hearing aid fitting were less for well babies than for NICU infants, for not-at-risk infants than for at-risk infants, and for infants with severe/ profound hearing loss than for infants with mild/ moderate hearing loss. However, median ages at early intervention enrollment were similar for nursery types, risk status, and severity of hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: Early ages of hearing loss identification, hearing aid fitting, and enrollment in early intervention can be achieved for infants from NICUs and WBNs and for infants at risk and not at risk for hearing loss in a large multi-center universal newborn hearing screening program.     

A pilot project on hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening: lessons learned

OBJECTIVE: This paper reports the performance of a newly implemented hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening programme and the challenges to the effective implementation. METHODS: Data of 4437 babies screened from April 2003 to February 2004 at Hospital Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia was analyzed to measure the performance of the newborn hearing screening programme. Quality indicators, which include the coverage rate, initial refer rate, return for follow-up rate, ages of diagnosis and intervention were calculated. Factors contributing to poor compliance for follow-up were examined through questionnaire survey of 341 parents who did not bring their babies for the initial screening follow-up. RESULTS: The findings of this study revealed unsatisfactory performance of the hearing screening programme compared to the Joint committee of Infant Hearing recommendation [Joint Committee on Infant Hearing Year 2000 Position Statement: Principles and Guidelines for Early Hearing Detection and Intervention Programs, Pediatrics 106 (4) (2000) 798-817]. The coverage rate, initial refer rate, and return for follow-up rate were 84.64, 11.97 and 56.97%, respectively. The average age of diagnosis was 3.56 months (S.D. 1.33). Only 1 of the 16 babies identified as having hearing loss through the screening programme has been fitted with hearing aids. Delay in coming to audiological certainty was one of the reasons hampering early intervention of these children. The commonly cited reasons for not returning for screening follow-up reflect the need to create public awareness of the importance of early diagnosis and intervention of hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: The implementation of the present screening programme needs to be reviewed. Factors contributing to its unsatisfactory performance must be identified and steps must be taken to resolve them so that early identification and intervention of permanent congenital hearing loss can become a reality.     

Hear early: New Mexico's universal newborn hearing screening program.

Hear Early, New Mexico's newborn screening program, was established in 1996. Thirty-one of the state's 32 birthing hospitals participate in the Hear Early program that now screens 95% of New Mexico's 27, 500 births. The authors' experience in developing this statewide system is described and the critical components and the rationale behind this program are addressed. The development of Hear Early required input from a wide variety of professionals and consumers. Screening is only the first step in a comprehensive state program, which must also include assessment and intervention. Systems development, equipment issues, follow-up procedures, data management, and a tracking system are all pertinent factors. The various accomplishments and challenges that Hear Early has encountered are discussed.     

TEOAE技术用于新生儿听力筛查的影响因素分析

目的在排除新生儿测试时的状态、探头放置、测试环境以及测试时机的前提下,探讨影响新生儿听力筛查(采用TEOAE测试方法)的相关因素。方法选用Otodynamics公司的ILO-88型耳声发射仪,采用瞬态声诱发耳声发射(transiently evoked otoacoustic emission,TEOAE)中的快速筛查程序(quick screening)对出生48小时以上的新生儿进行测试。并通过查询病历采集新生儿的出生史、母亲妊娠史、家族史等情况,采用SPSS 10．0统计软件进行统计学处理。结果通过控制测试时机、测试环境和测试技术等外在因素对通过率的影响外,本次实验发现性别、耳别、出生体重与TEOAE通过率间具有非常显著的统计学差异(尸＜0．01),分娩方式与TEOAE通过率间具有统计学差异(P＜0．05)。孕周、胎数、产次与TEOAE通过率间无统计学差异。结论性别、耳别、出生体重以及分娩方式对TEOAE筛查通过率有影响。     

Cost analysis of teoae-based universal newborn hearing screening

Although more and more hospitals are implementing universal newborn hearing screening programs, there is still very little information available about the costs of newborn hearing screening programs. The few articles which have been published evaluate technologies or protocols which are no longer used, are incomplete, or are based on hypothetical estimates of the costs and time necessary to do screening. After briefly reviewing the extant literature, this article describes a cost analysis of a TEOAE-based universal newborn hearing screening program. Reasons why the cost per baby ($7.42) is lower than in previous reports are explained, and the benefits of having accurate cost analysis data are summarized.     

The universal newborn hearing screening program of Taipei City

Objectives

To establish a hearing screening program with high coverage, low referral rate, high follow-up rate, and early intervention in Taipei City.

Methods

From September 2009 to December 2010, 85% delivery units in Taipei City, which includes 20 hospitals and 14 obstetrics clinics, were recruited into the screening program in two stages. A total of 15,930 babies were born in these participating hospitals and clinics during the program period. Among these neonates, 15,790 underwent hearing screening test with automatic auditory brainstem response (AABR). The screening was free of charge to the parents. The hearing screening examination was performed 24–36 h after birth. The same test was repeated between 36 and 60 h of age if the baby failed the first hearing test. The neonate was referred to the diagnostic hospitals for further investigations if he failed the second test.

Results

The screening coverage rate was 99.1% (15,790/15,930). The incidence of bilateral moderate to severe and unilateral hearing loss was 1.4 per 1000 (22/15,790) and 1.5 per 1000 (24/15,790), respectively. Four percent (626/15,790) of newborns failed to pass the initial screening test and 1.0% of newborns failed to pass the second screening test. Therefore, 1.0% newborns were referred for diagnostic assessments. The follow-up rate was 94.4% (151/160). Sixty-four percent (14/22) of babies with bilateral hearing loss completed the full diagnostic hearing tests within 3 months of birth.

Conclusions

The universal newborn hearing screening program is an adequate program for Taipei City with high coverage, low referral rate, and good follow-up rate. Screening fees covered by third parties, two-stage screening steps with AABR strategy, and the stringent monitoring system proved to be effective.

Level of evidence

2b, individual cohort study     

多地区农村的新生儿听力筛查

目的：探讨在农村地区开展新生儿听力筛查的可行性,为在全国农村地区推广此项工作提供参考依据。方法：研究对象为2004—01—2005—12出生于农村地区九个县的新生儿12638例。采用瞬态诱发性耳声发射的快速筛查程序对出生后2～7d的新生儿实施听力筛查;筛查未通过者于出生后4～6周复筛,复筛未通过者进行跟踪随访和听力学诊断性检查。结果：12638例中10845例（85．8％）新生儿接受了筛查,其中正常新生儿9963例（91．9％）,高危新生儿882例（8．1％）。初筛通过7450例（68．7％）,未通过3395例（31．3％）。拒绝筛查1793例,占14．2％（1793／12638）,其中正常新生儿833例（46．5％）,高危新生儿960例（53．5％）。未通过初筛应进行复筛的新生儿3395例,实际复筛2536例（74．7％）,未能复筛859例（25．3％）。复筛或初筛未通过应接受听力诊断120例,实际接受听力诊断79例（65．8％）,52例确诊听力损失的患儿中6例（7．6％）为双侧极重度听力损失,9例（11．4％）为重度听力损失（双耳7例,单耳2例）,11例（13．9％）为中度听力损失（双耳5例,单耳6例）,26例（32．9％）为轻度听力损失（双耳11例,单耳15例）;27例（34．2％）听力正常。本组先天性听力损失（包括单耳和双耳）的总发生率为0．5％（52／10845）,双侧听力损失的发生率为0．3％（29／10845）。正常新生儿听力损失发生率0．2％（22／9963）;高危新生儿听力损失发生率为3．4％（30／882）。13例双侧重度、极重度听力损失患儿中8例（61．5％）配戴了助听器,1例（7．7％）接受了人工耳蜗植入。结论：在农村地区开展新生儿听力筛查是必要的也是可行的。解决失访率高和转诊率低、提高高危新生儿筛查率仍是目前亟待解决的问题。     

Economic evaluation of long-term impacts of universal newborn hearing screening

Objective: Little is known about the long-term efficacious and economic impacts of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS). Design: An analytical Markov decision model was framed with two screening strategies: UNHS with transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) test and automatic acoustic brainstem response (aABR) test against no screening. By estimating intervention and long-term costs on treatment and productivity losses and the utility of life years determined by the status of hearing loss, we computed base-case estimates of the incremental cost–utility ratios (ICURs). The scattered plot of ICUR and acceptability curve was used to assess the economic results of aABR versus TEOAE or both versus no screening. Study sample: A hypothetical cohort of 200,000 Taiwanese newborns. Results: TEOAE and aABR dominated over no screening strategy (ICUR?=?$-4800.89 and $-4111.23, indicating less cost and more utility). Given $20,000 of willingness to pay (WTP), the probability of being cost-effective of aABR against TEOAE was up to 90%. Conclusions: UNHS for hearing loss with aABR is the most economic option and supported by economically evidence-based evaluation from societal perspective.     

Ten-year outcome of newborn hearing screening in Austria

OBJECTIVE: Current health care standards recommend that congenital hearing loss be confirmed before age three months and intervened for before age six months. This study evaluated to what extent the Austrian universal neonatal hearing screening (UNHS) program achieves this goal. The Austrian UNHS program is a hospital-based, two-stage screen based on transient oto-acoustic emissions, as promoted in 1995 in a position paper of the Austrian ENT Society. METHODS: Retrospective chart review and data analysis. All Austrian institutions engaged in the diagnosis and treatment of childhood hearing loss were requested to provide their data on children with permanent congenital sensorineural hearing impairment registered since 1990. Children who had undergone hearing screening, were compared to those who had not. Main outcome measures were age at confirmation of and age at intervention for the hearing loss. In each group, the percentage of children, whose hearing loss was confirmed by age three months, and intervened for by age six months, was determined. RESULTS: Data from 321 hearing-impaired children were useable. Of these children, 167 were screened and 154 were not. At age three months, a hearing loss was diagnosed in 35% of screened children, but in only 2% of unscreened. These percentages rose to 69% and 6%, respectively, at age six months and to 81% and 12%, respectively, at age one year. Intervention mostly started within less than one month after diagnosis. At age six months, 61% of screened children, but only 4% of unscreened children, had undergone intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Hearing screening enormously increases the number of early-detected children. However, in quite a few screened children hearing loss is neither confirmed within three months after birth, nor intervened for within six months after birth. Reasons for the delay must be paid attention in order to warrant that UNHS can be as effective as possible.     

Comparison of universal newborn hearing screening programs in Illinois hospitals

SUMMARY/OBJECTIVES: In accordance with the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing's (JCIH, 2000) position statement regarding Universal Newborn Hearing Screenings (UNHS), the state of Illinois enacted legislation requiring all birthing hospitals to conduct UNHS by 31 December 2002. Currently 100% of birthing facilities in the state of Illinois perform newborn infant hearing screenings using otoacoustic emissions (OAEs) and/or automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) measures. This study is an attempt to document current practices in hospital-based UNHS programs, as reported by program personnel, in the state of Illinois. The goal is to compare these reported practices to the recommended standards and identify factors that could lead to further refinement of the process. METHODS: A modified version of the Newborn Hearing Screening Survey from the Marion Downs National Center for Infant Hearing was used to gather practice- and protocol-related data for the 2004 calendar year via the World Wide Web. Data presented here are extracted from the online survey as reported by hospital staff presumably associated with the UNHS program. RESULTS: Fifty-nine of the 140 hospitals with UNHS programs responded to the Web-based survey. Nursing staff, followed by technicians, were most commonly reported to perform initial hearing screenings in both the well-baby nursery (WBN) and the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). Audiologists appeared to participate in re-screenings at a greater number of the facilities. Automated ABR was the most common screening tool (80%) followed by Distortion Product OAEs (32%) and Transient Evoked OAEs (5%). Eighty-six percent reported referral rates that were less than 5%, with 32% reporting a referral rate less than 1%. CONCLUSIONS: At the beginning of 2004, 99% of all infants born in Illinois were being screened for hearing loss. Personnel involvement and screening measures employed were comparable to the few reports available from other states. The audiologist's role was found to be fairly limited in screening, re-screening, or managing UNHS programs. Referral rates were consistent with national standards ( approximately 1%). Management of UNHS programs in small, rural facilities, tracking/monitoring high-risk infants, and other services provided to families emerged as areas with room for improvement.     

Pilot study of universal newborn hearing screening in Japan: district-based screening program in Okayama

OBJECTIVES: Newborn hearing screening was started in Okayama Prefecture in 2001 as part of a nationwide pilot study in Japan. Nearly 50,000 infants have been screened to date, and an observational study and more than 2 years of follow-up of this population are described in this report. METHODS: Between June 2001 and March 2005 (45 months), 47,346 neonates were screened with automated auditory brain stem response systems and followed up for at least 2 years. This total corresponds to 95% of the infants born in the 44 gynecologic institutions in this district. RESULTS: After undergoing the screening process twice, 248 infants (0.52%) received referrals; 108 of them had apparent bilaterally affected hearing, and 140 had apparent unilaterally affected hearing. Among the bilateral cases, hearing impairment was diagnosed in 40 infants, for a total prevalence of hearing impairment of 0.08%. In 3 additional infants who received a bilateral pass result and 1 infant who received a unilateral pass result, hearing impairment that was progressive or of late onset was subsequently diagnosed. The positive and negative predictive values were calculated as 40% and 99.993%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The screening program was carefully designed to work in the Japanese society and to be well managed in Okayama Prefecture.     

Improvement in early detection of congenital hearing impairment due to universal newborn hearing screening

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to determine whether universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) is effective in increasing the number of children whose hearing impairment is detected early, i.e. within the first 6 months of life. It also investigated whether UNHS contributes most to the early detection of moderately and severely hearing-impaired newborns, as suggested by a recently published report. METHODS: The study consisted of a retrospective analysis of the data of all children born in Tyrol between 1980 and 1999 and having an at least moderate permanent hearing loss in the better ear. RESULTS: The findings are that since UNHS was introduced in some newborn nurseries in 1995, a substantially higher number of hearing-impaired children has been detected early. For the whole sample, the increase of the early detection rate is 39.9%, with a 95% confidence interval of 33.2-46.8% (P<0.0001). For moderate hearing loss the increase is 49.2 with a 95% confidence intervall of 39.6-58.8% (P=0.000). CONCLUSIONS: On the whole, our findings lend support to the view that UNHS is effective in early detection of congenital hearing impairment. We conclude that UNHS provides the greatest benefit for moderately hearing-impaired children who, otherwise, would have been detected last.     

我国新生儿普遍听力筛查的现状、存在问题及对策思考

2009年6月1日起《新生儿疾病筛查管理办法》（卫生部令第64号正式开始施行,其中新生儿听力障碍的筛查是卫生部规定的必行项目之一,这标志着我国新生儿先天性听力障碍筛查技术从学术研究层面上升到政府组织的推广应用层面。这是中国听力学、耳科学、康复学等学者共同努力的结果。     

Predictive value of hearing assessment by the auditory brainstem response following universal newborn hearing screening

Abstract

Objective: This study set out to determine the accuracy with which tone pip ABR and click ABR, carried out in babies referred from universal newborn hearing screening, is able to predict the hearing outcome as determined by follow-up hearing tests. Study sample: The cohort of babies studied were all babies referred for hearing assessment from the universal newborn hearing screen in Sheffield, UK for the period January 2002 to September 2007, who were found to have a significant hearing impairment. Design: The results of hearing assessment following referral from the newborn hearing screen were collected together with those of follow-up tests carried out up to an age when behavioural testing had established ear- and frequency-specific thresholds at 0.5, 1, 2 and 4 kHz. Results: The standard deviation of the difference between the follow up and the tone pip ABR thresholds was 10.5 dB for the 4-kHz tone pip, 16.8 dB for the 1-kHz tone pip, and ranged between 21.7 and 24.7 dB for click ABR. Conclusions: The results of the study show that tone pip ABR following referral from newborn hearing screening has a similar accuracy to that reported in older subjects, and is a much better predictor compared to click ABR.