Investigation of the Prevalence of Congenital Cytomegalovirus (c CMV) Infection During the Newborn Hearing Screening Test; Case Follow-Up for Two Years

2022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zübeyde Eres Sarıtaş ◽  
Bilal Olcay Peker ◽  
Dilek Çolak ◽  
İmran Sağlık ◽  
Rabia Can Sarinoglu ◽  
...  
2018 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 26
Author(s):  
Inken Brockow ◽  
Kristina Söhl ◽  
Uta Nennstiel

Since the 1 January, 2009, newborn hearing screening (NHS) has been obligatory for every child in Germany. NHS is part of the Pediatrics Directive of the Federal Joint Committee. In this directive, details of the procedures and screening quality to be achieved are given. We evaluate if these quality criteria were met in Bavaria in 2016. The NHS data of children born in 2016 in Bavaria were evaluated for quality criteria, such as screening coverage in screening facilities, screening methods, referral rate (rate of failed tests at discharge) and a child’s age at the diagnosis of a hearing disorder. NHS was documented for 116,776 children born in Bavaria in 2016. In the first step, 78,904 newborns were screened with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions and 37,865 with automated auditory brainstem response. Of these, 9182 (7.8%) failed the first test in one or both ears. A second screening before discharge was performed on 53.3% of the newborns with a refer result in the first test, out of which 58.7% received a pass result. After the screening process, 4.6% of the newborns were discharged with a refer result. Only 18% of the first controls after discharge were performed by a pediatric audiologist. In 37.9% of the newborns, the screening center intervened to assure the control of any failed screening test. The median age of diagnosis for bilateral hearing loss was 5.3 months. In Bavaria, NHS was implemented successfully. A tracking system for all children who failed the hearing screening test is pivotal for early diagnosis and therapy of children with hearing deficiency.


2019 ◽  
Vol 29 (Supplement_4) ◽  
Author(s):  
A Doncarli ◽  
H Tillaut ◽  
V Goulet

Abstract Background The French newborn hearing screening programme set up in 2014 aims to identify affected children as early as possible to allow appropriate care. Our goal was to evaluate the implementation of this programme at the national level. Methods The programme consist in a screening using a test (T1) and a retest (T2) in the maternity hospital in all newborns. In some region, a delayed test (T3) is performed afterwards in children for whom it was not possible to confirm normal hearing. Children suspected of deafness subsequently enter the diagnosis phase. We defined evaluation indicators after stakeholders consultation. We developed a web application to collect aggregated data on live births. We estimated the rate of coverage, refusal, children suspected of hearing loss at the end of the screening phase and the prevalence of bilateral deafness. Results In 2015, one year after the initiation of the programme, the coverage rate was already very high (88%) and even more so in 2016 (96%). Parental acceptance was very good (refusal: 0.1%). By the end of 2016, 19 out 27 regions had added a T3. The rate of suspicion of bilateral hearing loss was decreased by using a T3 (1.4% vs 0.9%). Bilateral deafness rate, estimated after a 2-years follow up, was 1.3‰ although it was estimated only on 51.5% of suspected children for whom diagnosis data had been transmitted. Conclusions The objective of a 90% coverage set by the French ministry of health has been met after 2 years of operation of the program. T3 appears useful in relieving diagnostic structures from false positives. Our estimated prevalence of bilateral deafness could be more accurate if data collection was improved but is consistent with prevalence reported in North America. Key messages The universal newborn hearing screening program has been successfully set up in France in terms of coverage. Future work should focus on improving the collection of follow up data to better characterise diagnosed children.


PEDIATRICS ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 121 (2) ◽  
pp. e335-e343 ◽  
Author(s):  
C.-l. Liu ◽  
J. Farrell ◽  
J. R. MacNeil ◽  
S. Stone ◽  
W. Barfield

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document