OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of distortion product otoacoustic emission (DPOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) as first screening tool among non-risk newborns in a hospital with high delivery rate.
METHOD: A total of 722 non-risk newborns (1444 ears) were screened with both DPOAE and AABR prior to discharge within one month. Babies who failed AABR were rescreened with AABR ± diagnostic auditory brainstem response tests within one month of age.
RESULTS: The pass rate for AABR (67.9%) was higher than DPOAE (50.1%). Both DPOAE and AABR pass rates improved significantly with increasing age (p-value<0.001). The highest pass rate for both DPOAE and AABR were between the age of 36-48 h, 73.1% and 84.2% respectively. The mean testing time for AABR (13.54 min ± 7.47) was significantly longer than DPOAE (3.52 min ± 1.87), with a p-value of <0.001.
CONCLUSIONS: OAE test is faster and easier than AABR, but with higher false positive rate. The most ideal hearing screening protocol should be tailored according to different centre.
METHOD: Data was collected on 1085 CI recipients of as part of a prospective, longitudinal, observational, international, multi-centre, paediatric registry, initiated by Cochlear Ltd (Sydney, NSW, Australia). Outcome data from children (≤10 years old) implanted in routine practice was voluntarily entered into a central, externally hosted, e-platform. Collection occurred prior to initial device activation (baseline) and at six monthly follow-up intervals up to 24 months and then at 3 years post activation. Clinician reported baseline and follow up questionnaires and Categories of Auditory Performance version II (CAP-II) outcomes were collated. Self-reported evaluation forms and patient information were provided by the parent/caregiver/patient via the implant recipient baseline and follow up, Children Using Hearing Implants Quality of Life (CuHIQoL) and Speech Spatial Qualities (SSQ-P) Parents Version questionnaires.
RESULTS: Children were mainly bilaterally profoundly deaf, unilaterally implanted and used a contralateral hearing aid. Prior to implant 60% used signing or total communication as their main mode of communication. Mean age at implant was 3.2 ± 2.2 years (range 0-10 years). At baseline 8.6% were in mainstream education with no additional support and 82% had not yet entered school. After three years of implant use, 52% had entered mainstream education with no additional support and 38% had not yet entered school. In the sub-group of 141 children who were implanted at or after three years of age and were thus old enough to be in mainstream school at the three-year follow up, an even higher proportion (73%) were in mainstream education with no support. Quality of life scores for the child improved statistically significantly post implant compared to baseline and continued to improve significantly at each interval up to 3 years (p