Results Of Hearing Screening Research Articles

Effect of Delivery Modes on Hearing Screening Results

Effect of Delivery Modes on Hearing Screening Results

Hearing Screening Test Results of Newborns Conceived by Intracytoplasmic Sperm Injection: A Retrospective Study of Tertiary Referral Center

Objective: Assisted reproductive technologies (ART), especially intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI), is associated with birth defects. However, there are few reports on hearing screening tests of these babies. We aimed to determine the association between ART and hearing loss in newborns.Materials and methods: This retrospective study examined 246 ICSI newborns between 2013 and 2015. All the patients conceived by ICSI. We examined the hearing screening results of the babies.Results: A total of 25 newborns did not pass the first screening test, including 17 by transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) and 8 by auditory brainstem response (ABR). Ten babies did not pass the advanced examination. Total hearing loss affected 4% of ART babies.Conclusion: Hearing screening tests exposed deficient results in 4% of ICSI babies, which is ten times more frequent than spontaneously conceived newborns.

Risk factors of hearing defects and their relationship to the outcome of hearing screening among neonates

Background: Increased exposure to risk factors of hearing loss leads to a high susceptibility to deafness
 among neonates admitted to neonatal care units in developing countries.
 Objective: This article aims to study the prevalence of risk factors for neonatal hearing defect and determine their effect on the result of transient evoked otoacoustic emissions hearing test ( TEOAE). Methods: A longitudinal study was carried out for a period of one year from 1st October, 2016 to 30 th September, 2017 in the CWTH, Medical city, Baghdad, Iraq Demographic characteristics and certain risk factors were recorded for screened neonates. TEOAE test was done and if they failed to pass two steps, they were referred to
 autom ated auditory brainstem - response (AABR).
 Results: Out of 400 neonates, 342 (85.5%) passed from step 1TEOAE, while 58 (14.5%) were referred to step 2. From 58, 26 (44.8%) have passed step 2 and 32 (55.2%) not pass step 2 and were referred to AABR. From those 32 neonates with suspected hearing defect, NICU stay >7 days, ototoxic drugs >7days, use of ventilator >7 days, birth weight <1500gm, and craniofacial malformations were the main risk factors for hearing defects occurring in (90.6%), (90.6%), (59.4%), (40.6%), and (21.9%) respectively. 
 Conclusions: Low birth weight , long intensive care stay, mechanical ventilation, drugs ototoxicity and
 craniofacial malformation of neonates are the main risk factors for failed TEOAE test

Triagem auditiva na educação infantil: associação com determinantes de saúde

Objetivo: Descrever os resultados da triagem auditiva em escolares da educação infantil e verificar associação com aspectos socioeconômicos e histórico de saúde. Métodos: Amostra composta por 199 crianças. A coleta de dados consistiu na aplicação de questionário estruturado de caracterização da amostra do Critério de Classificação Econômica Brasil e realização de exame de Emissões Otoacústicas Evocadas Transientes. Resultados: A análise descritiva do perfil dos participantes revelou semelhança entre os sexos e média de idade de quatro anos e oito meses. No perfil auditivo observou-se que a maioria apresentou resultado “passa” no exame de emissões otoacústicas. Apesar de não apresentar resultado com significância estatística, a associação entre resultado das emissões otoacústicas e dados socioeconômicos revelou que a classificação do grau de escolaridade do chefe de família predominante foi analfabeto/ensino fundamental 1 incompleto, classificada no nível socioeconômico D/E do Critério de Classificação Econômica Brasil, a maioria possuía bolsa família e poucas crianças possuíam plano de saúde. A análise dos resultados “falha” das emissões otoacústicas e o histórico de saúde também não apresentaram resultado significante, mas revelou que das crianças que apresentaram este resultado, a maioria dos responsáveis respondeu que o escolar ouve bem, foi ao médico há menos de 12 meses, não faz uso de medicamentos e não realiza algum tipo de tratamento. Conclusões: A maioria das crianças apresentou resultado “passa” nas emissões otoacústicas e não houve associações com significância estatística entre a triagem auditiva escolar, os aspectos socioeconômicos e histórico de saúde.

Newborn hearing screening results of refugees living in our city and the factors affecting the results

ObjectivesTo investigate the changes in the risk factors affecting the results of the Newborn Hearing Screening (NHS) and the hearing test results of the Syrian refugees in our city. MethodsSyrian and Turkish newborns, born in our hospital between 01.01.2016 and 31.12.2017 and referred to our hospital from environmental hospitals for NHS, were included in this study. NHS results and risk factors were analyzed. Results786 Syrian and 7230 Turkish newborns were included in this study. 53 (6,74%) infants referred in both ears, 26 (3,30%) infants in the one ear. There was a significant relationship between the presence of hearing loss and the history of intensive care unit admittance, presence and absence of low birth weight and neonatal icterus at Syrian newborns. In the same period, 20 (0,3%) Turkish infants referred bilaterally and 45 (0,6%) newborns unilaterally (25 right ear, 20 left ear). There was a significant difference between Turkish and Syrian newborns in terms of very low and low birth weight and intensive care unit admittance. ConclusionsThe rate of hearing loss in Syrian refugee patients is quite high. Pregnant refugee women who are forced to migrate because of war face many risk factors and these people need to be included into the newborn hearing screening programs in the country where they took refuge in.

The Effect of Mode of Delivery on Newborn Hearing Screening Results.

Congenital hearing loss is one of the most important public health problems with a frequency of about 1-6 per 1000 live births all over the world. Although neonatal hearing screening tests are important for the timely detection and rehabilitation of hearing loss, determining the factors that may affect the screening results will contribute greatly to the development of screening programs. In this study, the effects of the modes of delivery on the results of tests in the screening program was investigated. In this study, the results of 10.575 newborns who were screened according to the National Neonatal Hearing Screening Protocol between January 2013 and May 2017 were evaluated. The screening test results of 2.653 newborns were examined retrospectively according to the type of delivery after candidates were excluded according to the exclusion criteria and risk factors for hearing loss. Of these newborns, 1.571 (59.2%) were born by normal delivery and 1.082 (40.8%) by cesarean section. Screening test results were analyzed using Pearson's Chi-square test. No statistically significant difference was observed among the 2.653 neonatal hearing screening test results in terms of mode of delivery (p>0.05). In both delivery modes, the rate of false positive was found to be high (81.9%) in the first hearing screening test of newborns, and this rate decreased in the second screening test (14.5%). The mode of delivery has no significant effect on the neonatal hearing screening results; however, the observation that neonates had been more successful in the second screening test in both groups suggests that the test protocol should be re-evaluated in terms of timing.

Evaluation of Newborn Hearing Screening Results in a Period of Four Years Newborn Hearing Screening Results

Amaç: Konjenital işitme kaybı, yenidoğan bebeklerde görülen en yaygın doğumsal bozukluktur. Yenidoğanlarda işitme taraması, işitme kaybı olan bebeklerin mümkün olduğunca erken tanı almasını amaçlar. Bu çalışmamızda hastanemizde dört yıllık sürede, 8451 yenidoğan bebeğe yapılan işitme taraması sonuçlarının değerlendirilmesi ve sunulması amaçlanmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntemler: Çalışmamıza, 1 Ocak 2013–31 Aralık 2016 tarihleri arasında hastanemizde doğan ve risk faktörü olup başka hastaneden işitme taraması için sevk edilmiş bebekler alındı. Testler bebek taburcu olmadan odyometrist tarafından otoakustik emisyon (TOAE, transient evoked autoacoustic emissions) yöntemi ile yapıldı. İkinci basamakta; iki kere TOAE testini geçemeyen veya risk faktörü olan veya risk faktörü olduğu için başka hastaneden sevk edilen bebeklere TABR yapıldı. İşitme taraması yapılan bebeklerin kayıtları ve sonuçlar değerlendirildi. Bulgular: Dört yıllık sürede 8451 bebeğe işitme taraması yapılmıştır. Bunların 4968’ine birinci basamak işitme testi uygulanırken, risk faktörleri nedeniyle veya dış merkezlerden 2 kez TOAE testinden kaldığı için gönderilen 4007 bebeğe TABR yapıldı. TOAE testi uygulanan 4968 bebekten 4134’ü (%83,2) birinci basamakta geçti. İkinci test için çağrılan 834 (%16,7) bebekten kontrole gelen 524 (%10,5) bebeğin tamamı testi geçti, 310 (%6,2) bebek ise kontrole gelmedi. TABR testi uygulanan 4007 bebekten 3652’si (%91,1) testi geçerken, 355’i (%8,8) ikinci TABR testi için çağrıldı. Yüz on (%2,7) bebek kontrole gelmezken, kontrole gelen 245 (%6,1) bebekten 98 (%2,4) bebek üçüncü basamakta değerlendirilmek üzere sevk edildi. Kesin işitme kaybı olan 19 (%0,22) bebek tespit edildi. Sonuıç: İşitme taraması ile tüm yenidoğanların değerlendirilmesi, işitme kaybı olan bebeklerin mümkün olduğunca erken tanı alması amaçlanmaktadır. İşitme kaybı olan bebeklerin erken tanı ve rehabilitasyonu ile yaşlarına uygun sosyal, duygusal ve dil gelişimini sağlamak mümkün olacaktır.

Hearing Screening in the Community.

Adults typically wait 7-10 yr after noticing hearing problems before seeking help, possibly because they are unaware of the extent of their impairment. Hearing screenings, frequently conducted at health fairs, community events, and retirement centers can increase this awareness. To our knowledge, there are no published studies in which testing conditions and outcomes have been examined for multiple "typical screening events." The purpose of this article is to report hearing screening outcomes for pure tones and self-report screening tests and to examine their relationship with ambient noise levels in various screening environments. One thousand nine hundred fifty-four individuals who completed a hearing screening at one of 191 community-based screening events that took place in the Portland, OR, and Tampa, FL, metro areas. The data were collected during the recruitment phase of a large multisite study. All participants received a hearing screening that consisted of otoscopy, pure-tone screening, and completion of the Hearing Handicap Inventory-Screening Version (HHI-S). In addition, ambient sound pressure levels were measured just before pure-tone testing. Many more individuals failed the pure-tone screening (n = 1,238) and then failed the HHI-S (n = 796). The percentage of individuals who failed the pure-tone screening increased linearly with age from <20% for ages <45 yr to almost 100% for individuals aged ≥85 yr. On the other hand, the percentage of individuals who failed the HHI-S remained unchanged at approximately 40% for individuals aged ≥55 yr. Ambient noise levels varied considerably across the hearing screening locations. They impacted the pure-tone screen failure rate but not the HHI-S failure rate. It is important to select screening locations with a quiet space for pure-tone screening, use headphones with good passive attenuation, measure sound levels regularly during hearing screening events, halt testing if ambient noise levels are high, and/or alert individuals to the possibility of a false-positive screening failure. The data substantiate prior findings that the relationship between pure-tone sensitivity and reported hearing loss changes with age. Although it might be possible to develop age-specific HHI-S failure criteria to adjust for this, such an endeavor is not recommended because perceived difficulties are the best predictor of hearing health behaviors. Instead, it is proposed that a public health focus on education about hearing and hearing loss would be more effective.

Ambient noise levels and hearing screening outcomes: where technology meets clinical decision making

Purpose: The current study aimed to determine the mean ambient noise levels within a risk-based newborn hearing screening (NHS) programme. It further aimed to investigate the relationship between the ambient noise levels and the screening outcome. A descriptive, longitudinal, repeated measures, within-subjects design was employed. Three hundred and twenty-five neonates from two public sector hospitals were enrolled in an NHS programme.Methods: These neonates underwent an initial hearing screening in the wards, and were thereafter booked for a repeat hearing screening which was conducted in an outpatient clinic within the hospital setting. Screening included transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs), distortion product otoacoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR). The maximum ambient noise levels were measured and recorded for each screening session. Data related to mean ambient noise levels were analysed using descriptive statistics. The independent samples t-test and the Wilcoxon rank sum test were used to determine the association between the ambient noise levels and screening outcomes.Results: Results indicated that the ambient sound levels were significantly higher for ears which referred, compared to ears which passed.Conclusion: Findings from the current study highlight the need for monitoring of ambient noise levels across all screening contexts, and consideration of the inclusion of sound level measurements when planning for hearing screening programmes, particularly for contexts where environmental adaptations may not be possible.

Neonatal hearing screening of newborns of mothers with Diabetic Mellitus and/or hypertension in pregnancy: a systematic literature review

ABSTRACT Purpose: to investigate the results of the Neonatal Hearing Screening (NHS) in neonates whose mothers presented hypertension and/or diabetes mellitus in their pregnancy. Methods: a systematic review of the literature, without restriction of year and language, guided by the PRISMA protocol, that was carried out through a search in the MEDLINE (PUBMED), LILACS (BVS), SCOPUS, WEB OF SCIENCE and EMBASE databases, using neonatal screening AND hearing AND (hypertension OR diabetes mellitus) as descriptors. Studies that were duplicated or were unavailable were excluded. Results: 64 records were found, 5 being included for analysis. These articles had been published in the last 13 years, originated from different countries, and using a retrospective (cross-sectional, n=1, case-control, n=1) or prospective design (cross-sectional, n=1, case-control, n=1; cohort, n=1). The findings of the articles demonstrated differences regarding the presence of changes in the NHS outcomes of newborns whose mothers presented hypertension and/or diabetes during pregnancy. Conclusion: since the review showed contradictory results regarding changes in the NHS outcomes in the presence of mothers’ hypertension and/or diabetes during pregnancy, prospective cohort studies are needed, in different contexts, in order to isolate confounding factors for hearing loss and minimize measurement bias and selection.

Retrospective Evaluation of Results of Newborn Hearing Screening and Importance of Patient Record System

Objective The aim of the present study was to evaluate hearing screening results of 3490 newborns who underwent newborn hearing screening between 2015-2017 in Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Medicine Department of Otolaryngology, to asses deficiencies of our record system, and to share our retrospective results by comparing with the results in the literature. Material and Method Hearing screening results of infants who were born in Cumhuriyet University between March 2015 and February 2017, were referred to neonatal intensive care or transferred from other out-of-town or inner city hospitals to our university was retrospectively evaluated in the present study. Results There was a statistically significant difference for the left ear TEOAE test results and gender (p<0.05, p=0.016, x 2 =5.78). And also summarizes the distribution of ABR test results in terms of gender while failure rate was statistically significant in the right ear in terms of gender (p<0.05, p=0.022, x 2 =1.33). Conclusion When results of the present study were evaluated, it was found that while they were similar to some results in the studies on this issue in the literature, they showed great differences than some of them. Our main goal was to evaluate insufficiencies in record systems of both our hospital and external centers while we were planning the present study. Our results revealed that these records were not paid enough attentions at external centers and our record system had some insufficiencies.

Children with GJB2 gene mutations have various audiological phenotypes.

The current study retrospectively investigated variations in audiological phenotypes in children with GJB2 gene mutations. Subjects were 128 infants and young children who were seen as outpatients by Otology at Beijing Tongren Hospital from 2012 to 2018. Of the 128 subjects, 99 had biallelic truncating (T/T) mutations and 29 had truncating/nontruncating (T/NT) mutations. Genotypes, results of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS), and the degree and symmetry of hearing loss were examined in the two groups. Twenty-two subjects (20.37%, 22/128) passed UNHS, including 13 children with T/T mutations and 9 with T/NT mutations. Of the 128 subjects, 22 had normal hearing, 2 had unilateral hearing loss, and 115 had bilateral hearing loss. Severe-to-profound hearing loss was the most prevalent phenotype in children with T/T mutations (73.23%), while normal hearing was prevalent in children with T/NT mutations (41.38%). Symmetrical hearing loss was the main phenotype in both groups, and the number of subjects with symmetrical hearing loss did not differ significantly between the two groups. Therefore, children with GJB2 gene mutations have phenotypic variability in terms of their results of UNHS and their degree and symmetry of hearing loss. Subjects with T/NT mutations of the GJB2 gene were more likely to pass UNHS and had milder hearing loss compared to those with T/T mutations. Symmetrical hearing loss was the main phenotype in the two groups, but 36.53% of children had bilateral asymmetric hearing loss. Parents of all subjects with sensorineural hearing loss were informed that their children may have a GJB2 mutation.

Analysis of clinical audiology and etiology in 72 twins aged 0-4 years

Objective:To investigate the clinical audiological characteristics of twins and analyze the risk factors for hearing loss. Method：The subjects were 72 cases,selected from our hospital otological outpatient of 0 to 4 years old twins. All subjects underwent universal newborn hearing screening and had definite results. At the same time, acoustic immittance,auditory brainstem response, auditory steady-state response, pediatric behavior audiometry and other audiological tests were carried out. Subjects were divided into two groups according to whether with high risk factors for hearing loss: 42 patients(58.33%) in group A(risk factor group) and 30 patients(41.67%) in group B (no risk factor group).The results of universal newborn hearing screening(UNHS),hearing diagnosis, degree of hearing loss, type of hearing curve and risk factors categories of hearing loss were analyzed for both groups of subjects.Result:In 72 cases,41 were males and 31 were females. Thirty-one were the first born and 41 were the second born. Age distribution of first visit:3 to 40 months, median age: 4-6 months.Forty-seven(65.27%) failed in the UNHS. The failing rate was higher in group A(76.19%) than in group B(50.00%).Fifty(69.44%) were diagnosed with hearing loss.78.57% of hearing loss was diagnosed in group A, which was higher than that in group B(56.67%).The degree of hearing loss in group A was mainly profound(43.55%) and group B was moderate(48.00%).The differences above all was statistically significant.For the hearing curve type, group A(35.48%) and group B(40.00%) were both mainly flat-type, the difference was not statistically significant. In 72 cases, there were 42 cases(58.33%) with risk factors for hearing loss, of which 38.1% had two or more kinds of risk factors and 61.9% had one kind of risk factor.Hyperbilirubinemia was the major risk factor(34.92%).Conclusion:69.44% of twins had a confirmed hearing loss. Those with risk factors had higher failing rate of UNHS and more serious hearing loss.58.33% of twins had risk factors for hearing loss, and individuals with two or more kinds of risk factors were much more. Hyperbilirubinemia takes the first place and should be paid enough attention by clinicians.

Improving universal newborn hearing screening outcomes by conducting it with thyroid screening

ObjectivesOne of the most important factors that can improve hearing screening indicators is testing infants after 48 h of birth. The neonatal thyroid screening program is done during the third to fifth day after birth in many countries. So this screening is done at the appropriate time for hearing screening. The aim of the present study was to evaluate hearing screening outcomes (the referral rate, false positive rate, and positive predictive value) conducted with the thyroid screening at the healthcare centers and compare the results with hospital before discharge the infant. MethodsThis was a prospective exploratory cohort study. The study population included all the newborns at a hospital (group 1) and newborns who were referred to healthcare centers for thyroid screening (group 2), except for infants with risk factors, from March 2012 to December 2017. Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automatic auditory brainstem response (AABR) were used for the evaluation. The results were compared between the two groups. ResultsOf the 4729 newborns, who participated in the study, 3001 were referred from a hospital (group 1) and 1728 from two healthcare centers (group 2). The referral rate in group 1 and 2 was 16.1% and 7.6%, respectively. Also, the false positive rate in group 1 and 2 was 15.9% and 7.6%, respectively. Our study showed that the referral rate and false positive rate of hearing screening in group 2 were significantly lower than that in group 1 (p < 0.001). The positive predictive value in group 1 was significantly higher than that in group 2 (p < 0.05). There was no significant sex difference in any of the variables. ConclusionsOur results showed that performing the hearing screening during the thyroid program, instead of the hospital could be significantly improved screening outcomes and suggest that hearing and thyroid screening together after discharge from the hospital could be a good opportunity to introduce new framework for hearing screening in many countries.

Analysis of genotypes and audiological characteristics of children with SLC26A4 gene pathogenic mutations

Objective:To explore the correlation of SLC26A4 genotype and audiology.Method:The subjects were 70 children aged 0 to 7 years old, who were admitted to otological outpatient department.All subjects received nine crystal hereditary deafness gene chip and confirmed by (or)SLC26A4 gene full coding region detection.The patients were diagnosed as homozygous or compound heterozygous mutations.At the same time,acoustic immittance,auditory brainstem response, auditory steady state response and pediatric behavior audiometry, newborn hearing screening and other audiological tests were displayed. According to the genotype, the subjects were divided into two groups: group A (SLC26A4 gene homozygous mutation) in 40 cases, group B (SLC26A4 gene compound heterozygous mutation) in 30 cases. The frequency of SLC26A4 gene mutation, the two groups of genotypes and hearing screening results,the degree of hearing loss and audiometric configurations were analyzed statistically. Result: In 70 patients, the top 4 of the 70 patients with high frequency of mutations were IVS7-2A> G(76.43%), 2168A> G(15.00%), 1226G> A(2.86%) and 2000T> C(2.16%), respectively. 34.29% of newborns passed hearing screening with single or double ears, among which group A and group B were 32.50% and 36.67%,respectively. There was no statistically significant difference between two groups in hearing screening. The degree of hearing loss in group A(56.25%) and group B(48.33%) were mainly profound and there was no significant difference between them. The audiometric configurations: group A(60.00%) was mainly high frequency loss type, while group B(55.00%) was mainly flat type. The difference between them was statistically significant.Conclusion:The mutation sites of SLC26A4 gene were mainly IVS7-2A> G, and the degree of hearing loss was mostly profound. To the audiometric configurations,SLC26A4 gene homozygous mutant were mainly high frequency loss type, while SLC26A4 gene compound heterozygous mutant were mainly flat type. 34.29% children passed universal newborn hearing screening with one ear at least, which indicates SLC26A4 gene mutations can result in late-onset hearing loss, so those patients should be attached great importance..

The follow-up results of newborn hearing screening of Gaziosmanpasa Taksim Research and Training Hospital.

This study aimed to present the results of newborns who were referred to advanced audiology centers after newborn hearing screening, and to determine concordance of our results with the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines about the ages of hearing loss, aid fitting, and cochlear implantation. A total of 7502 newborns were screened in Gaziosmanpaşa Taksim Research and Training Hospital between March 2014 and June 2016 using the transient otoacustic emissions test as the first two steps and automated auditory brainstem response test for the third step. Newborns who had risk factors were screened using the automated auditory brainstem response only. Newborns who failed the screening tests were referred to advanced audiology centers. Of the 7502 newborns, 6736 (90%) completed the screening. The ratio of hearing loss was 0.08%. Six of 62 newborns who failed auditory brainstem response test and were referred to advanced audiology centers had severe bilateral hearing loss. One of the patients was not fitted with a hearing aid because the family refused it. The other one was not fitted an aid and did not undergo cochlear implantation because of severe and treatment-resistant acute otitis media. The age of diagnosis for the rest was before three months, and except for one patient, hearing aid fitting was before six months. The age of cochlear implantation was 12 months for two patients and 14 months for two patients. Ninety percent of patients completed the screening, the age of diagnosis for hearing loss was before three months and aid fitting was before six months, except for one patient. The results of the study were compatible with the diagnosis and treatment guidelines of the American Academy of Pediatrics.

Normal neonatal hearing screening did not preclude sensorineural hearing loss in two-year-old very preterm infants.

Very preterm infants are at risk of neonatal hearing loss. However, it is unknown whether infants with a normal neonatal hearing screening result risk sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) at a later age. This cohort study was conducted at the Erasmus Medical University Center Rotterdam, the Netherlands, on 77 very preterm infants born between October 2005 and September 2008. All infants underwent auditory brainstem response audiometry during neonatal hearing screening and at two years of corrected age. The frequency of SNHL in infants with a normal neonatal hearing screening was analysed and the risk factors associated with newly diagnosed SNHL in these infants were examined. We found that 3.9% (3/77) of the very preterm infants showed permanent hearing loss during their neonatal hearing screening. In addition, a relatively high prevalence of newly diagnosed SNHL (4.3%) was found in three of the 70 infants followed up at the age of two. The total prevalence rate of permanent hearing loss in the cohort was approximately 8%. A normal outcome of neonatal hearing screening did not guarantee normal hearing at two years of age in this very preterm cohort and paediatricians should be alert to the possibility of late-onset SNHL.

Evaluation and Importance of Our Newborn Hearing Screening Results

Evaluation and Importance of Our Newborn Hearing Screening Results

Maternal Emotional Reactions towards Results of Newborn Hearing Screening: A Cross Sectional Survey

...

Initial Otoacoustic Emission Hearing Screening Results in Newborns with Patent Ear Canals, Vernix Caseosa and Collapsed Ear Canals

...