Current Issue
Volumes and Issues
For Authors
Manuscript Guidelines
Review Process
Conflict of Interest
Copyright
About the Journal
Editorial Board
Aim and Scope
Policy and Ethical Guidelines
Promotion of the Journal
Print-Version Subscription
Publisher and Contact Information
Contact Information
Sign in
SPECIAL REPORT
RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MONITORING HEARING IN
CHILDREN USING A RISK FACTOR REGISTRY
1
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences, The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Queensland, Australia
2
Clinical and State-wide Services, Queensland Health, Queensland Government, Queensland, Australia
Publication date: 2012-09-30
Corresponding author
Rachael Beswick
Rachael Beswick, Level 13, Block 7, Cnr Herston & Bowen Bridge Rds, Herston, Queensland 4029, Australia, e-mail: Rachael_Beswick@health.qld.gov.au
Rachael Beswick, Level 13, Block 7, Cnr Herston & Bowen Bridge Rds, Herston, Queensland 4029, Australia, e-mail: Rachael_Beswick@health.qld.gov.au
J Hear Sci 2012;2(3):57-65
KEYWORDS
ABSTRACT
Background:
The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) of the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends targeted surveillance of at-risk infants using a risk factor registry, in conjunction with parent and/or professional monitoring to detect hearing loss that develops after newborn hearing screening. However, criticisms of these recommendations are emerging as targeted surveillance programs are costly, resource intensive, have poor follow-up rates, and lack evidence of best practice. The purpose of the current paper is to provide recommendations for risk factor registries incorporated within targeted surveillance programs.
Methods:
Recommendations provided in this document were developed by combining the results of previous research, done with a systematic review of the literature, together with a comprehensive evaluation of a targeted surveillance program in Queensland, Australia.
Results:
Recommendations are as follows. Children with the risk factors of family history or craniofacial anomalies should have their hearing monitored, whereas children with the risk factor of low birth weight should not. Children with the risk factors of syndrome or prolonged ventilation should potentially have their hearing monitored; however, the evidence is not definitive. Equally, children with bacterial meningitis, hyperbilirubinemia, or professional concern as a risk factor may potentially not need their hearing monitored, but again the evidence is not definitive. For the risk factors of severe asphyxia and congenital infection, the evidence was inconclusive and/or conflicting, so no recommendations are made.
Conclusions:
More research is needed to further inform evidence-based clinical policy recommendations for hearing loss detection in early childhood.
The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) of the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends targeted surveillance of at-risk infants using a risk factor registry, in conjunction with parent and/or professional monitoring to detect hearing loss that develops after newborn hearing screening. However, criticisms of these recommendations are emerging as targeted surveillance programs are costly, resource intensive, have poor follow-up rates, and lack evidence of best practice. The purpose of the current paper is to provide recommendations for risk factor registries incorporated within targeted surveillance programs.
Methods:
Recommendations provided in this document were developed by combining the results of previous research, done with a systematic review of the literature, together with a comprehensive evaluation of a targeted surveillance program in Queensland, Australia.
Results:
Recommendations are as follows. Children with the risk factors of family history or craniofacial anomalies should have their hearing monitored, whereas children with the risk factor of low birth weight should not. Children with the risk factors of syndrome or prolonged ventilation should potentially have their hearing monitored; however, the evidence is not definitive. Equally, children with bacterial meningitis, hyperbilirubinemia, or professional concern as a risk factor may potentially not need their hearing monitored, but again the evidence is not definitive. For the risk factors of severe asphyxia and congenital infection, the evidence was inconclusive and/or conflicting, so no recommendations are made.
Conclusions:
More research is needed to further inform evidence-based clinical policy recommendations for hearing loss detection in early childhood.
REFERENCES (32)
1.
JCIH (American Academy of Pediatrics). Year 2007 position statement: principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Pediatrics, 2007; 120(4): 898–921.
2.
Beswick R, Driscoll C, Kei J: Monitoring for postnatal hearing loss using risk factors: a systematic literature review. Ear Hear, 2012a [in press].
3.
Kennedy C, Kimm L, Cafarelli Dees D et al: Controlled trial of universal neonatal screening for early identification of permanent childhood hearing impairment. Wessex Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Trial Group. Lancet, 1998; 352(9145): 1957–64.
4.
Mehl AL, Thomson V: The Colorado newborn hearing screening project, 1992–1999: on the threshold of effective population-based universal newborn hearing screening. Pediatrics, 2002; 109(1): E7.
5.
Hutt N, Rhodes C: Post-natal hearing loss in universal neonatal hearing screening communities: current limitations and future directions. J Paediatr Child Health, 2008; 44(3): 87–91.
6.
Northern J, Downs M: Hearing in children. 5th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins, 2002.
7.
Watkin PM, Baldwin M, Laoide S: Parental suspicion and identification of hearing impairment. Arch Dis Child, 1990; 65(8): 846–50.
8.
Watkin PM, Hasan J, Baldwin M, Ahmed M: Neonatal hearing screening: have we taken the right road? Results from a 10-year targeted screen longitudinally followed up in a single district. Audiological Medicine, 2005; 3: 175–84.
9.
Beswick R, Driscoll C, Kei J, Glennon S: Targeted surveillance for postnatal hearing loss: a program evaluation. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2012b; 78: 1046–56.
10.
Beswick R, Driscoll C, Kei J et al: Which risk factors predict postnatal hearing loss in children? J Am Acad Audiol, 2012c [in press].
11.
National Health and Medical Research Council. NHMRC levels of evidence and grades for recommendations for developers of guidelines: Australian Government, 2009.
12.
Robertson CMT, Howarth TM, Bork DLR, Dinu IA: Permanent bilateral sensory and neural hearing loss of children after neonatal intensive care because of extreme prematurity: a thirty-year study. Pediatrics, 2009; 123(5): e797–807.
13.
Thiringer K, Kankkunen A, Liden G, Niklasson A: Perinatal risk factors in the aetiology of hearing loss in preschool children. Dev Med Child Neurol, 1984; 26(6): 799–807.
14.
Weichbold V, Nekahm-Heis D, Welzl-Mueller K: Universal newborn hearing screening and postnatal hearing loss. Pediatrics, 2006; 117(4): e631–36.
15.
Roth DA, Hildesheimer M, Bardenstein S et al: Preauricular skin tags and ear pits are associated with permanent hearing impairment in newborns. Pediatrics; 2008; 122(4): e884–90.
16.
Borradori C, Fawer CL, Buclin T, Calame A: Risk factors of sensorineural hearing loss in preterm infants. Biol Neonate, 1997; 71(1): 1–10.
17.
Konkle DF, Knightly CA: Delayed-onset hearing loss in respiratory distress syndrome: case reports. J Am Acad Audiol, 1993; 4(6): 351–54.
18.
Masumoto K, Nagata K, Uesugi T et al: Risk factors for sensorineural hearing loss in survivors with severe congenital diaphragmatic hernia. Eur J Pediatr, 2007; 166(6): 607–12.
19.
Mann T, Adams K: Sensorineural hearing loss in ECMO survivors. Extracorporeal membraneous oxygenation. J Am Acad Audiol, 1998; 9(5): 367–70.
20.
Fligor BJ, Neault MW, Mullen CH et al: Factors associated with sensorineural hearing loss among survivors of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation therapy. Pediatrics, 2005; 115(6): 1519–28.
21.
Salamy A, Eldredge L, Tooley WH: Neonatal status and hearing loss in high-risk infants. J Pediatr, 1989; 114(5): 847–52.
22.
Hendricks-Munoz KD, Walton JP: Hearing loss in infants with persistent fetal circulation. Pediatrics, 1988; 81(5): 650–56.
23.
Hutchin ME, Gilmer C, Yarbrough WG: Delayed-onset sensorineural hearing loss in a 3-year-old survivor of persistent pulmonary hypertension of the newborn. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2000; 126(8): 1014–17.
24.
Kawashiro N, Tsuchihashi N, Koga K et al: Delayed post-neonatal intensive care unit hearing disturbance. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 1996; 34(1–2): 35–43.
25.
Lasky RE, Wiorek L, Becker TR: Hearing loss in survivors of neonatal extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) therapy and high-frequency oscillatory (HFO) therapy. J Am Acad Audiol, 1998; 9(1): 47–58.
26.
Fowler KB, McCollister FP, Dahle AJ et al: Progressive and fluctuating sensorineural hearing loss in children with asymptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection. J Pediatr, 1997; 130(4): 624–30.
27.
Iwasaki S, Yamashita M, Maeda M et al: Audiological outcome of infants with congenital cytomegalovirus infection in a prospective study. Audiol Neurootol, 2007; 12(1): 31–36.
28.
Ross SA, Fowler KB, Ashrith G et al: Hearing loss in children with congenital cytomegalovirus infection born to mothers with pre-existing immunity. J Pediatr, 2006; 148(3): 332–36.
29.
Rivera LB, Boppana SB, Fowler KB et al: Predictors of hearing loss in children with symptomatic congenital cytomegalovirus infection. Pediatrics, 2002; 110(4): 762–67.
30.
Brown ED, Chau JK, Atashband S et al: A systematic review of neonatal toxoplasmosis exposure and sensorineural hearing loss. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2009; 73(5): 707–11.
31.
Lü J, Huang Z, Yang T et al: Screening for delayed-onset hearing loss in preschool children who previously passed the newborn hearing screening. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2011; 75(8): 1045–49.
32.
Watkin PM, Baldwin M: Identifying deafness in early childhood: requirements after the newborn hearing screen. Arch Dis Child, 2011; 96(1): 62–66.
Share
RELATED ARTICLE
We process personal data collected when visiting the website. The function of obtaining information about users and their behavior is carried out by voluntarily entered information in forms and saving cookies in end devices. Data, including cookies, are used to provide services, improve the user experience and to analyze the traffic in accordance with the Privacy policy. Data are also collected and processed by Google Analytics tool (more).
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
You can change cookies settings in your browser. Restricted use of cookies in the browser configuration may affect some functionalities of the website.
