The purpose of this study is to present the results of the first 2 years of universal newborn hearing screening and the prevalence of congenital hearing loss in Monterrey, Mexico.
We performed a descriptive study of the first 2 years after starting of the newborn screening program in a private hospital in Mexico. The program is organized into levels. We using for initial evaluation an automated auditory brainstem response (AABR). If the test was positive, the audiologist conducted and auditory brainstem response (ABR) test and other specialized testing was performed. Babies with hearing impairment were referred for early intervention.
A total of 3066 newborns were screened (99.9%). The prevalence of sensorineural and bilateral hearing loss was of 0.65/1000 newborns. Seventy-three neonates (2.37%) had a risk factor for hearing impairment. A total of 0.22% (n=7) of those studied were referred for ABR testing. Of the patients referred to the audiologist, 100% were seen. The positive predictive value for sensorineural hearing loss was 71.4% (95% CI 30.2-94.8) and the false positive rate was 0.065%. Of the subjects screened, 100% were diagnosed before the age of 3 months, but all babies began treatment after the age of 6 months. No cochlear implants were indicated.
This is the first report of a universal hearing screening program in Mexico. Even though this study had a reduced sample, the findings of hearing loss rate in this study are similar to the results found in other countries.
"Many other countries – some of them in Africa , , the Middle East ,  and the Far East , , ,  – are momentarily trying to implement such a comprehensive universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS). Among them, there are developing and emerging nations , ,  such as Malaysia , Thailand , Mexico  and India . In Europe, various endeavors are being undertaken to introduce universal newborn hearing screening. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: The universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) is currently spreading in Germany, as well, even though there can be no talk of a comprehensive establishment. The introduction of UNHS in several federal states such as Hamburg, Hessen, and Schleswig-Holstein can be ascribed to the personal commitment of individual pediatric audiologists. Apart from the procurement of the screening equipment and the training of the staff responsible for the examination of the newborns, the tracking, i.e. the follow-up on children with conspicuous test results, is of utmost importance. This involves significant administration effort and work and is subject to data protection laws that can differ substantially between the various federal states. Among audiologists, there is consensus that within the first three months of a child's life, a hearing loss must be diagnosed and that between the age of 3 and 6 months, the supply of a hearing aid must have been initiated. For this purpose, screening steps 1 (usually a TEOAE measurement) and 2 (AABR testing) need to be conducted in the maternity hospital. The follow-up of step 1 then comprises the repetition of the TEOAE- and AABR measurement for conspicuous children by a specialized physician. The follow-up of step 2 comprises the confirmatory diagnostics in a pediatric audiological center. This always implies BERA diagnostics during spontaneous sleep or under sedation. The subsequent early supply of a hearing aid should generally be conducted by a (pediatric) acoustician specialized on children.
"Nepal and Bangladesh were excluded in the final analysis as the respondents reported that no infant hearing screening programme had commenced in these countries at the time of the survey despite substantial presence of multilateral institutions and donor agencies. Three more countries (Jordan, Qatar and Singapore) and Pakistan were added to the list of countries based on the results from our electronic searches of the internet and PubMed making a total of 18 countries including Hong Kong and Taiwan as shown in Table 1[32-49]. "
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: Early detection of infants with permanent hearing loss through infant hearing screening is recognised and routinely offered as a vital component of early childhood care in developed countries. This article investigates the initiatives and progress towards early detection of infants with hearing loss in developing countries against the backdrop of the dearth of epidemiological data from this region.
A cross-sectional, descriptive study based on responses to a structured questionnaire eliciting information on the nature and scope of early hearing detection services; strategies for financing services; parental and professional attitudes towards screening; and the performance of screening programmes. Responses were complemented with relevant data from the internet and PubMed/Medline.
Pilot projects using objective screening tests are on-going in a growing number of countries. Screening services are provided at public/private hospitals and/or community health centres and at no charge only in a few countries. Attitudes amongst parents and health care workers are typically positive towards such programmes. Screening efficiency, as measured by referral rate at discharge, was generally found to be lower than desired but several programmes achieved other international benchmarks. Coverage is generally above 90% but poor follow-up rates remain a challenge in some countries. The mean age of diagnosis is usually less than six months, even for community-based programmes.
Lack of adequate resources by many governments may limit rapid nationwide introduction of services for early hearing detection and intervention, but may not deter such services altogether. Parents may be required to pay for services in some settings in line with the existing practice where healthcare services are predominantly financed by out-of-pocket spending rather than public funding. However, governments and their international development partners need to complement current voluntary initiatives through systematic scaling-up of public awareness and requisite manpower development towards sustainable service capacities at all levels of healthcare delivery.
BMC Health Services Research 02/2007; 7:14. DOI:10.1186/1472-6963-7-14 · 1.71 Impact Factor
[Show abstract][Hide abstract] ABSTRACT: This presentation of the public health impact of hearing impairment highlights the important elements of interaction between the disability and community. OBJECTIVES: Retrospective study to identify the size of the problem of hearing loss, illustrating not only the magnitude but also the serious effect of the lack of reliable data concerning this matter. It highlights the challenges met within a mid-economy community regarding the handling of the impact of the disability. The Egyptian data is given as an example of the situation in a mid-economy community. STUDY DESIGN: A brief introduction of some epidemiological factors of hearing impairment is presented including the size of the problem in Egypt. Data of the neonatal hearing screening program of the Audiology Unit, Ain Shams University, is presented. The impact of the disability is then discussed in relation to the age of onset and the degree and type of hearing loss. This is followed by the description of the nature and effect of the disability in the different age groups. A discussion of the various factors that may modify the capability of the community to deal with such disability follows. This includes various economic indices with their possible limitations on the part of the community. Such a briefing illustrates the challenges met in the rehabilitation of the deaf and the hearing-impaired in a developing mid-economy country. The broad lines of the management of the problem both at the prophylactic as well as the rehabilitative levels are discussed. A final remark on recommendations and possible future development in a developing country is presented.
Data provided are for informational purposes only. Although carefully collected, accuracy cannot be guaranteed. The impact factor represents a rough estimation of the journal's impact factor and does not reflect the actual current impact factor. Publisher conditions are provided by RoMEO. Differing provisions from the publisher's actual policy or licence agreement may be applicable.