Evaluation of guidelines for universal newborn hearing screening programs

2020 ◽  
Vol 63 (1) ◽  
pp. 7-7
Author(s):  
Lynn Spivak
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing

Comparison of universal newborn hearing screening programs in Illinois hospitals

2007 ◽  
Vol 71 (2) ◽  
pp. 217-230 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lia M. Ferro ◽  
Gail Tanner ◽  
Susan F. Erler ◽  
Kristine Erickson ◽  
Sumitrajit Dhar
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing

scholarly journals Universal newborn hearing screening: the Belgian experience

2020 ◽  
Vol 30 (Supplement_5) ◽  
Author(s):  
E Lerut ◽  
B Van Overmeire ◽  
S Scholtissen ◽  
C Guérin ◽  
T Pereira ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Comparative Analysis ◽  
Birth Cohort ◽  
Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Automated Auditory Brainstem Response ◽  
Newborn Hearing ◽  
Brainstem Response

Abstract Issue Worldwide 466 million people suffer from hearing loss (HL), of whom 34 million children. Early detection of HL in newborns through screening and subsequent intervention significantly improve their developmental and psychosocial outcome. The WHA adopted a resolution on prevention of deafness and HL (2017), urging the member states 'to develop, implement and monitor screening programs for early identification of ear diseases'. Population based newborn hearing screening (PNHS) by automated otoacoustic emission (AOAE) and/or automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) is considered good practice. Description of the Problem Flanders (FL): PNHS by AABR at the age of 2-3 weeks (pass/refer), repeated in case of 'refer'. At 2x 'refer', referral to a tertiary hearing center. French speaking community (FSC): newborns with risk factors for congenital HL are immediately referred to ENT. Others undergo AOAE at day 2-3 (pass/refer with retest in case of 'refer'). At 2x 'refer', referral to ENT for AABR. German speaking community: no data available. Results Coverage rate: FL (birth cohort 2014): 96-98%. FSC (birth cohort 2016): 94.9% of newborns without risk factors had a 1st test. 8.7% of newborns with risk factors didn't have any test. Detection rate/1000 tested newborns FL: 2.1 newborns with congenital HL. FSC: 2.33 newborns with HL (0.30 perceptive/0.36 permanently conductive/0.75 temporary conductive/0.1 conductive NOS/0.06 mixed type/0.77 NOS). Lessons Belgium has at least 2 quality PNHS programs. Due to program differences (different tests/age of testing/registration/financing) in depth comparative analysis on their performance, outcome and cost effectiveness is currently lacking (future perspective). Key messages PNHS is common in high income countries, but is not yet integrated worldwide. In the light of the 2017 WHA resolution Belgium might inspire regions and countries starting up PNHS. An in depth comparative analysis of the current Belgian PNHS programs is needed.

scholarly journals Newborn Hearing Screening Benefits Children, but Global Disparities Persist

2022 ◽  
Vol 11 (1) ◽  
pp. 271
Author(s):  
Katrin Neumann ◽  
Philipp Mathmann ◽  
Shelly Chadha ◽  
Harald A. Euler ◽  
Karl R. White
Keyword(s):  
Large Scale ◽  
Hearing Screening ◽  
World Health ◽  
Quality Data ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
The World ◽  
Newborn Hearing ◽  
Health Organization

There is substantial evidence that newborn hearing screening (NHS) reduces the negative sequelae of permanent childhood hearing loss (PCHL) if performed in programs that aim to screen all newborns in a region or nation (often referred to as Universal Newborn Hearing Screening or UNHS). The World Health Organization (WHO) has called in two resolutions for the implementation of such programs and for the collection of large-scale data. To assess the global status of NHS programs we surveyed individuals potentially involved with newborn and infant hearing screening (NIHS) in 196 countries/territories (in the following text referred to as countries). Replies were returned from 158 countries. The results indicated that 38% of the world’s newborns and infants had no or minimal hearing screening and 33% screened at least 85% of the babies (hereafter referred to as UNHS). Hearing screening programs varied considerably in quality, data acquisition, and accessibility of services for children with PCHL. In this article, we summarize the main results of the survey in the context of several recent WHO publications, particularly the World Report on Hearing, which defined advances in the implementation of NHS programs in the Member States as one of three key indicators of worldwide progress in ear and hearing care (EHC).

Practicality, Validity, and Cost-Efficiency of Universal Newborn Hearing Screening Using Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions

1995 ◽  
Vol 17 (1) ◽  
pp. 9-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
Karl R. White ◽  
Thomas R. Behrens ◽  
Bonnie Strickland
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Loss ◽  
Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Screening Program ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing

Although the importance of identifying significant hearing loss at an early age has long been recognized, it is generally acknowledged that newborn hearing screening programs in the United States have not been very successful. The problem has been that available techniques were impractical, too expensive, or invalid. This article summarizes the data regarding the use of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) in a universal newborn hearing screening program and describes various facets of program implementation. It is concluded that available data provide clear evidence that TEOAE can be used to significantly reduce the average age of identification for hearing loss in the U.S.

State of the States

1998 ◽  
Vol 7 (2) ◽  
pp. 101-114 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Hoberg Arehart ◽  
Christine Yoshinaga-Itano ◽  
Vickie Thomson ◽  
Sandra Abbott Gabbard ◽  
Arlene Stredler Brown
Keyword(s):  
Hearing Screening ◽  
Intervention Programs ◽  
First Year ◽  
Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Screening Programs ◽  
Universal Newborn Hearing Screening ◽  
Newborn Hearing ◽  
Comprehensive Survey ◽  
Screening Assessment ◽  
And Child Health

This study reports the results of a comprehensive survey of 16 states regarding the coordination and characteristics of universal newborn hearing screening, audiologic assessment, and intervention programs. The survey establishes a baseline assessment that was conducted by states as part of their first year of participation in a Maternal and Child Health Bureau grant on state systems for universal newborn hearing screening, assessment, and intervention. States are making progress toward achieving universal newborn hearing screening. However, several issues continue to impede the establishment of statewide systems for linking screening programs to diagnosis and intervention.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document