The Journal of pediatrics · 2009
Evaluation of hearing loss after failed neonatal hearing screening.
Сравнительное исследованиеОценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Holster Ingrid L, Hoeve Lambertus J, Wieringa Marian H, Willis-Lorrier Rose M S, de Gier Henriette H W
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: We evaluated the causes of hearing loss found after failed universal newborn hearing screening and compared the results with the previously used behavioral observation test (Ewing/CAPAS).
STUDY DESIGN: Hearing loss in neonates, born between September 1999 and October 2007 and referred to our center after failed screening, was determined by audiologic testing and physical examination.
RESULTS: In 340 included neonates the results of hearing tests were as follows: normal hearing 21.2%, conductive hearing loss 20.3%, and sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) 57.9%. Children referred from the neonatal intensive care unit were more at risk of SNHL (71%) than those from the well-baby clinics (54%). Hearing aids were provided at a median age of 8 months. The positive predictive value of SNHL screening was 54% for a child from a well-baby clinic and 71% for a child from the neonatal intensive care unit.
CONCLUSION: The use of universal newborn hearing screening results in a lower proportion of infants positive because of otitis media with effusion than the previously used Ewing/CAPAS test (20% vs 59-81%). Second, screening leads to identification of hearing loss and intervention at a younger age (8 months vs 15-18 months). Third, the positive predictive value for SNHL has improved (54% vs 2%).
STUDY DESIGN: Hearing loss in neonates, born between September 1999 and October 2007 and referred to our center after failed screening, was determined by audiologic testing and physical examination.
RESULTS: In 340 included neonates the results of hearing tests were as follows: normal hearing 21.2%, conductive hearing loss 20.3%, and sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) 57.9%. Children referred from the neonatal intensive care unit were more at risk of SNHL (71%) than those from the well-baby clinics (54%). Hearing aids were provided at a median age of 8 months. The positive predictive value of SNHL screening was 54% for a child from a well-baby clinic and 71% for a child from the neonatal intensive care unit.
CONCLUSION: The use of universal newborn hearing screening results in a lower proportion of infants positive because of otitis media with effusion than the previously used Ewing/CAPAS test (20% vs 59-81%). Second, screening leads to identification of hearing loss and intervention at a younger age (8 months vs 15-18 months). Third, the positive predictive value for SNHL has improved (54% vs 2%).
Предметные рубрики MeSH
Age FactorsAudiometryChild, PreschoolCohort StudiesFemaleFollow-Up StudiesHearing Loss, ConductiveHearing Loss, SensorineuralHearing TestsHumansInfantInfant, NewbornIntensive Care Units, NeonatalMaleNeonatal ScreeningNetherlandsPredictive Value of TestsReferral and ConsultationRetrospective StudiesRisk AssessmentSeverity of Illness IndexSex Factors