Neonatal Hearing Screening: failures, hearing loss and risk indicators.

Raquel Mari Onoda, Marisa Frasson de Azevedo, Am��lia Miyashiro Nunes dos Santos
Author Information
  1. Raquel Mari Onoda: Departamento de Fonoaudiologia.

Abstract

To check the rate of failure, hearing loss and its association with demographic variables and risk indicators for hearing loss in newborns submitted to the Newborn Hearing Screening in a secondary hospital.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Cross-sectional and retrospective study, involving 1,570 newborns submitted to the different stages of the Newborn Hearing Screening Program. Initially, we carried out otoacoustic emission tests (ILO Echocheck) and the cochlear-eyelid reflex. Afterwards, we analyzed the demographic and clinical characteristics of the newborns, screening rate of failure, hearing loss and its association with demographic variables and risk indicators.
RESULTS: Twenty-six newborns had failures in the first stages of the Program (1.7%), who were then referred to diagnostic evaluation. Of these, 16 (61.5%) did not come, two (7.7%) had normal results and eight (30.8%) were diagnosed with hearing disorders. The screening failure rate was 1.7% and the frequency of hearing disorders was 0.5%.
CONCLUSIONS: Pre-term newborns of very low birth weights had higher rates of screening failures and a greater occurrence of hearing changes. The factors associated with screening failure and hearing changes were similar to the ones described in the literature.

References

  1. Pediatrics. 2006 Apr;117(4):e631-6 [PMID: 16585279]
  2. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2009 May-Jun;75(3):381-6 [PMID: 19649489]
  3. Arch Otolaryngol. 1967 Jan;85(1):15-22 [PMID: 6016245]
  4. Turk J Pediatr. 2005 Jul-Sep;47(3):203-12 [PMID: 16250303]
  5. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2010 Jan-Feb;76(1):121-8 [PMID: 20339700]
  6. Pediatrics. 2005 Oct;116(4):933-8 [PMID: 16199704]
  7. Child Care Health Dev. 2006 Jan;32(1):33-45 [PMID: 16398789]
  8. Pro Fono. 2007 Jul-Sep;19(3):267-78 [PMID: 17934602]
  9. Acta Paediatr. 2007 Aug;96(8):1150-4 [PMID: 17578491]
  10. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006 Feb;70(2):241-6 [PMID: 16029898]
  11. Otol Neurotol. 2004 May;25(3):318-22 [PMID: 15129112]
  12. Srp Arh Celok Lek. 2007 May-Jun;135(5-6):264-8 [PMID: 17633310]
  13. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol. 2006 Jul;70(7):1283-9 [PMID: 16488484]
  14. ORL J Otorhinolaryngol Relat Spec. 2003 Jul-Aug;65(4):199-201 [PMID: 14564092]
  15. Acta Paediatr. 2005 Apr;94(4):458-63 [PMID: 16092461]
  16. J Pediatr (Rio J). 2003 Mar-Apr;79(2):103-4 [PMID: 14502328]
  17. Cad Saude Publica. 2007 Jun;23(6):1431-41 [PMID: 17546334]
  18. Pediatrics. 2007 Oct;120(4):898-921 [PMID: 17908777]

MeSH Term

Brazil
Cross-Sectional Studies
Female
Gestational Age
Hearing Loss
Hearing Tests
Humans
Infant, Low Birth Weight
Infant, Newborn
Male
Neonatal Screening
Otoacoustic Emissions, Spontaneous
Prevalence
Retrospective Studies
Risk Factors

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0hearingnewbornsfailurelossscreeningratedemographicriskindicatorsHearing1failures7%associationvariablessubmittedNewbornScreeningstagesProgram5%disorderschangeschecksecondaryhospitalMATERIALSANDMETHODS:Cross-sectionalretrospectivestudyinvolving570differentInitiallycarriedotoacousticemissiontestsILOEchocheckcochlear-eyelidreflexAfterwardsanalyzedclinicalcharacteristicsRESULTS:Twenty-sixfirstreferreddiagnosticevaluation1661cometwo7normalresultseight308%diagnosedfrequency0CONCLUSIONS:Pre-termlowbirthweightshigherratesgreateroccurrencefactorsassociatedsimilaronesdescribedliteratureNeonatalScreening:

Similar Articles

Cited By