Advertisement

European Archives of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology

, Volume 267, Issue 8, pp 1199–1205 | Cite as

Evaluation of an automated auditory brainstem response in a multi-stage infant hearing screening

  • Luca Guastini
  • Renzo MoraEmail author
  • Massimo Dellepiane
  • Valentina Santomauro
  • Massimiliano Mora
  • Antonio Rocca
  • Angelo Salami
Otology

Abstract

An automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) method, the Maico MB-11 with BERAphone®, has been developed for hearing screening in newborns. The aim of this study was to test the validity of this automated ABR screening method in a multistage newborn hearing screening (NHS). We applied a “five level” protocol using transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE), AABR-MB-11 with BERAphone® and conventional auditory brainstem response (ABR). TEOAE, AABR, and conventional ABR testing were performed by ENT specialists experienced in neonatal screening techniques. Among the 8,671 newborns tested (males 3,889; females 4,782), only 42 newborns were lost to follow-up and the final false-positive rate was of 0.03%. Our experience highlights that for the neonatal period, conventional auditory brainstem response is the most reliable method for assessing the hearing level and minimizing the false-positive rate. Although AABR (performed by ENT specialists experienced in neonatal screening techniques) is easy to use, fast and with a good compliance, the device is unable to provide accurate and certain diagnosis on the degree of hearing loss to allow a proper treatment.

Keywords

Automated auditory brainstem response Conventional auditory brainstem response False positive rate Newborn hearing screening Transient evoked otoacoustic emission 

Notes

Conflict of interest statement

None.

References

  1. 1.
    Kotby MN, Tawfik S, Aziz A, Taha H (2008) Public health impact of hearing impairment and disability. Folia Phoniatr Logop 60:58–63CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hutt N, Rhodes C (2008) Post-natal hearing loss in universal neonatal hearing screening communities: current limitations and future directions. J Paediatr Child Health 44:87–91CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Katbamna B, Crumpton T, Patel DR (2008) Hearing impairment in children. Pediatr Clin North Am 55:1175–1188CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vohr B, Jodoin-Krauzyk J, Tucker R, Johnson MJ, Topol D, Ahlgren M (2008) Early language outcomes of early-identified infants with permanent hearing loss at 12 to 16 months of age. Pediatrics 122:535–544CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Valencia DM, Rimell FL, Friedman BJ, Oblander MR, Helmbrecht J (2008) Cochlear implantation in infants less than 12 months of age. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 72:767–773CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Korres SG, Balatsouras DG, Gkoritsa E, Eliopoulos P, Rallis E, Ferekidis E (2006) Success rate of newborn and follow-up screening of hearing using otoacoustic emissions. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 70:1039–1043CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Olusanya BO, Somefun AO, Swanepoel de W (2008) The need for standardization of methods for worldwide infant hearing screening: a systematic review. Laryngoscope 118:1830–1836CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Benito-Orejas JI, Ramírez B, Morais D, Almaraz A, Fernández-Calvo JL (2008) Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 72:1193–1201CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin HC, Shu MT, Lee KS et al (2005) Comparison of hearing screening programs between one step with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and two steps with TEOAE and automated auditory brainstem response. Laryngoscope 115:1957–1962CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Olusanya BO, Wirz SL, Luxon LM (2008) Hospital-based universal newborn hearing screening for early detection of permanent congenital hearing loss in Lagos, Nigeria. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 72:991–1001CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Robinshaw HM (2005) Early intervention for hearing impairment: differences in the timing of communicative and linguistic development. Br J Audiol 29:315–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Meier S, Narabayashi O, Probst R, Schmuziger N (2004) Comparison of currently available devices designed for newborn hearing screening using automated auditory brainstem and/or otoacoustic emission measurements. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 68:927–934CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Iwasaki S, Hayashi Y, Seki A et al (2003) A model of two-stage newborn hearing screening with automated auditory brainstem response. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 67:1099–1104CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Hille ET, van Straaten HI, Verkerk PH, Dutch NICU Neonatal Hearing Screening Working Group (2007) Prevalence and independent risk factors for hearing loss in NICU infants. Acta Paediatr 96:1155–1158Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Melagrana A, Casale S, Calevo MG, Tarantino V (2007) MB11 BERAphone and auditory brainstem response in newborns at audiologic risk: comparison of results. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 71:1175–1180CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kolski C, Le Driant B, Lorenzo P, Vandromme L, Strunski V (2007) Early hearing screening: what is the best strategy? Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 71:1055–1060CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lin HC, Shu MT, Lee KS, Lin HY, Lin G (2007) Reducing false positive rate in newborn hearing screening program: how and why. Otol Neurotol 28:788–792CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Hatzopoulos S, Petruccelli J, Ciorba A, Martini A (2009) Optimizing otoacoustic emission protocols for a UNHS program. Audiol Neurootol 14:7–16CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bansal S, Gupta A, Nagarkar A (2008) Transient evoked otoacoustic emissions in hearing screening programs: protocol for developing countries. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol 72:1059–1063CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Korres S, Nikolopoulos TP, Peraki EE et al (2008) Outcomes and efficacy of newborn hearing screening: strengths and weaknesses (success or failure?). Laryngoscope 118:1253–1256CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Illing RB (2004) Maturation and plasticity of the central auditory system. Acta Otolaryngol S552:6–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Barsky-Firkser L, Sun S (1997) Universal newborn hearing screenings: a three-year experience. Pediatrics 99:E4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mehl AL, Thomson V (1998) Newborn hearing screening: the great omission. Pediatrics 101:E4CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  • Luca Guastini
    • 1
  • Renzo Mora
    • 1
    Email author
  • Massimo Dellepiane
    • 1
  • Valentina Santomauro
    • 1
  • Massimiliano Mora
    • 1
    • 2
  • Antonio Rocca
    • 1
  • Angelo Salami
    • 1
  1. 1.ENT DepartmentUniversity of GenoaGenoaItaly
  2. 2.Villa Scassi HospitalGenoaItaly

Personalised recommendations