Transient evoked otoacoustic emission-based screening in typical nurseries: a response to Jacobson and Jacobson (original) (raw)
Related papers
Maintaining acceptably low referral rates in teoae-based newborn hearing screening programs
Journal of Communication Disorders, 1997
This article describes factors that can affect the refer rate for otoacoustic emission (OAE) based newborn hearing screening, including the population of infants being screened, the adequacy of probe fit, software options used, external ear conditions, screener training, and baby handling. The effect of the infant's age on screening outcomes is also discussed using results of screening for 1328 regular nursery newborns, ranging in age from 6 to 60 hours, who were screened with transient evoked otoaoustic emissions (TEOAE) prior to hospital discharge. The youngest infants (6-9 hours old) were as likely to pass (90% pass rate) as the infants who were 24-27 hours old (94% pass rate). The results of this study are consistent with reports from many TEOAE-based screening programs that have demonstrated that acceptably low refer rates (mean ϭ 6.9%) can be obtained when appropriate screening procedures are followed. © 1997 by Elsevier Science Inc.
Neonatal Hearing Screening with Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions: A Learning Curve
International Journal of Audiology, 1999
The present paper reports on the implementation of a neonatal hearing screening programme in a private hospital in Belgium. A maternity-based neonatal hearing screening project with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs) was started in 1993. The cost of the test was not covered by the public health insurance, so the parents had to pay the full cost for screening their child (approximately 30 Euro). Since 1993 the programme strategies have been changed on several occasions to improve the quality and efficacy. A retrospective analysis was performed on: (1) the test pass rate; (2) the coverage; and (3) the number of children who become 'Lost to follow-up' after failing the initial test. The data show a steady learning curve with a time course of several years. They also demonstrate that it is worthwhile and feasible to run a high-quality screening programme in a private establishment.
Effectiveness Of Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE) Test For Neonatal Auditory Screening
Journal of Bahria University Medical and Dental College, 2018
Objective: The purpose of this study is to assess the efficacy of Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE) as screening test for auditory function in neonates. Study Design: A cross-sectional study Place and Duration of Study: This study was conducted at United Medical and Dental College, Creek General Hospital, Karachi, from July 2106 to May 2017. A total number of 120 newborn babies were screened for hearing loss before discharge from hospital but 20 were lost for follow up and 100 cases were included in this study. Method: TEOAE was done in all neonates born during this period at 3rd day after birth. Those who were found to have hearing loss, TEOAE was repeated at the end of 1st week and again in 6th week after birth. BERA was done in those cases who showed hearing loss on TEOAE on all three occasions. All the 100 cases were followed up regularly for more than one year for appearance of any sign or symptom related with hearing loss or speech development failure. Result: Out ...
The Medical journal of Malaysia, 2005
Early identification and management of hearing impairment is very valuable. The goal standard measurement of hearing loss is by brainstem evoked response (BSER). This prospective study was conducted in Hospital University Kebangsaan Malaysia (HUKM) to determine the sensitivity and specificity of transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) as a screening tool for hearing impairment from February 1999 to February 2000. One hundred and thirty-three newborns from postnatal ward and seventy-eight newborns from neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were screened for possible hearing loss using portable TEOAE. This study showed that TEOAE is a very sensitive but moderately specific screening tool.
Hippokratia, 2016
OBJECTIVE Comparison of the efficacy of Transitory Evoked Otoacoustic Emissions (TEOAEs) and Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emissions (DPOAEs) in a neonatal hearing screening protocol, based on a three-stage strategy. METHODS In the first stage, a hearing screening using both evoked emissions was conducted in 3,480 neonates from March 2006 through January 2012. Both TEOAEs and DPOAEs were recorded. Neonates, who did not undergo the test before being discharged, were examined within 30 days at a scheduled appointment. Follow-up of the referred newborns (second-stage screening) was performed as an outpatient re-screening, within a month. The third-stage evaluation, i.e., the diagnostic testing, included a clinical otolaryngological examination, high-frequency tympanometry at 1,000 Hz and Auditory Brainstem Response (ABR) measurements. RESULTS A total of 3,480 (97%) newborns (n =1,765 males) out of 3,595 infants were enrolled in the study. In the first-stage evaluation, 8.9 % of the in...
Making universal newborn hearing screening a success
International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology, 2006
Objective: Following a long period of pilot study, Iaso maternity hospital established a universal newborn hearing screening program based on transiently evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAEs). The aim of this study is to present the improvement of outcome measures of this program, comparing the results of two groups of newborns screened successively. Methods: We analyzed data from two groups of full-term newborns screened at our setting. The first group included all newborns born and screened during the initial 3 years of application of the program and the second group included all newborns born and screened during the next 2 years. TEOAEs were performed during the first days after birth. All newborns who failed the initial test underwent repeat testing with TEOAEs before hospital discharge. Newborns with absence of otoacoustic emissions were referred to follow-up test after 1 month. Results were compared between the two groups. Results: The first group included 22,195 newborns-examined during 3 years and the second group included 25,032 newborns-examined during 2 years, due to reduction of * Corresponding author. Present address: 23 Achaion Street -Ag. Paraskevi, GR-15343 Athens, Greece. Tel.: +30 210 600 4683;
2016
Objective: It is often said that repeating OAE hearing screening more than two or three times per ear creates statistical artifacts that unacceptably increase false-negatives (i.e., passing babies who have permanent hearing loss). This study evaluated the accuracy of that recommendation for screening with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE). Design: The false negative rate was estimated using a 2.0 cc coupler and three human ears with moderate or worse hearing loss. Using those results and the prevalence of hearing loss among newborns, the number of babies with hearing loss that would be missed due to repeated testing was calculated. Results: Only 1% of ears with moderate or worse hearing loss will be missed due to statistical probability of false-negatives resulting from repeated testing. Conclusions: Excessive repeated testing in a newborn hearing screening program wastes time; raises questions about accuracy of screening; and may disturb the infant, family, or hospital staff. Repeated TEAOE testing does not cause statistical artifacts that result in a significant number of babies with hearing loss to pass the screening test. Not repeating screening tests often enough may needlessly inflate the number of babies referred for diagnostic testing and create financial burdens and worry for families.
Referral Rates of Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission and Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission in Neonatal Hearing Screening: Two-step Protocol in Chennai, 2021
Background: The present study is aimed at finding the referral rates in Transient Evoked Otoacoustic Emission (TEOAE) and Distortion Product Otoacoustic Emission (DPOAE) in well-born and high-risk infants, using two-step hearing screening protocol with TEOAE and DPOAE, and to compare and contrast the referral rates in the first screening. Subjects and Methods: A prospective study design was carried out on 404 neonates (808 ears) who were screened between June 2019 and February 2021 at Voluntary Health Services, Chennai. All subjects were randomly selected with inclusion and exclusion criteria. All newborns were screened with both TEOAE and DPOAE. 'Pass' and 'refer' were tabulated to calculate the referral rates and Chi-square test was done to find the significance between the groups. Results: Among 404 (100%) neonates screened, 364 (90.14%) were well-born and 40 (9.90%) were high-risk babies. The total referral rate for TEOAE was 88 (10.90%) among which 77 (21.15%) were well-born babies and 11 (27.50 %) were high-risk infants. Total referral rate in DPOAE was 91 (11.27%) among which 75 (20.06%) were well-born and 16 (40%) were high-risk infants. Statistical analysis revealed no significant difference between the groups (p=0.000). Conclusion: TEOAE is a rapid test with low referral rates and more acceptability. DPOAE, with greater sensitivity, frequency specificity and better SNR, is more accurately used for infants with high-risk registers. Both the OAEs can be used for all the infants as a screening procedure in a two-step protocol.