[Neonatal hearing screening. A comparison of automatic auditory brainstem audiometry and otoacoustic emissions].

INTRODUCTION

The annual birth rate in Denmark is 65,000. Approximately 100 of these children have a congenital bilateral hearing loss which requires treatment. Furthermore, it is expected that yet another 150 newborns have a unilateral hearing loss. Treatment of the hearing loss within the first six months is fundamental in order to ensure optimal use of speech and language, as well as normal social adaptation. The purpose of this study is to compare the two screening methods for hearing loss in newborns as recommended in Denmark--ie. Transient-Evoked Oto-Acoustic Emission (TEOAE) and Automatic Auditory Brainstem Response (AABR).

MATERIALS AND

METHODS

During a period of six months, 1627 children were bilaterally screened with both AABR and TEOAE. The equipment used was Bio-logic's ABaer hearing screening system. Time usage and the number of refers was recorded.

RESULTS

Of the 1627 children, 67 (4% ) were referred on one or both ears when using AABR, compared to 177 (11% ) when using TEOAE, which is a statistically significant difference (p = 2.43 x 10-16). Re-screening and further examinations in the Department of Audiology identified five children as suffering from a hearing loss. The average time used to perform AABR was 6.6 min.s compared to 3.8 min.s for TEOAE.

CONCLUSION

AABR is well chosen as primary screening method. The time usage and equipment costs related to AABR exceed those of TEOAE, but this seems acceptable considering the larger number of re-screenings and further examinations in the Department of Audiology when using TEOAE.