DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.18203/2349-3291.ijcp20221069

Diagnostic ability of otoacoustic emission and automated auditory brainstem response in hearing screening of high-risk newborn

Rema Chandramohan, Asmita Chandramohan, Karthik Ramanathan

Abstract


Background: Early identification of hearing impairment in infants and appropriate intervention can prevent severe psychosocial, educational, and linguistic repercussions. Infants who are not identified before 6 months of age have delays in speech and language development.

Methods: This was a prospective cohort study OAE and AABR were administered to high-risk neonates discharged from NICU and the diagnostic ability to pick up hearing loss was assessed by trained audiologist. Statistical analysis was interpreted by McNemar paired Chi-square test (χ2) test. Factors which correlated with deafness were interpreted by Pearson chi-square (χ2) test.

Results: Among 144 babies screened, 26 failed OAE while 6 failed AABR. Referral rate was 18.1% with OAE and 4.2% with AABR. All 6 babies failed with 40db and 90 db screening. Mean duration of NICU stay had a positive correlation with AABR positivity. Babies with higher duration of NICU stay had greater probability of hearing loss. Age and gender had no significant correlation with hearing loss. Sensitivity of OAE as 16.7 % and the specificity was 81.9 %. Positive likelihood ratio with OAE was.923. Negative likelihood ratio with OAE was 1.02. One neonate out of 6 with jaundice had profound hearing loss.

Conclusions: It was concluded that in high-risk neonates the diagnostic value of DPOAE for identification of hearing loss, when used alone, was limited since OAE has higher referral rate and lower specificity compared to AABR. Babies with higher duration of NICU stay had greater probability of hearing loss.


Keywords


Neonatal hyperbilirubinemia, Oto acoustic emission, Automated auditory brainstem response

Full Text:

PDF

References


Yoshinaga-Itano C. Early intervention after universal neonatal hearing screening: impact on outcomes. Ment Retard Dev Disabil Res Rev. 2003;9(4):252-66.

Singh V. Newborn hearing screening: Present scenario Indian J Community Med. 2015;40:62-5

Paul AK. Early identification of hearing loss and centralized newborn hearing screening facility-the Cochin experience. Indian Pediatr. 2011;48(5):355-9.

Patel H, Feldman M. Universal newborn hearing screening. Paediatr Child Health. 2011;16(5):301-10.

Vohr BR. Hearing Loss in Newborn Infant. In: Fanaroff A and Martin RJ eds. Neonatal Perinatal Medicine. Disease of the Fetus and Infant. 9th ed. St. Louis: Elsevier; 2009:1049-56.

American Academy of Pediatrics, Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Year 2007 position statement: Principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Pediatrics. 2007;120(4): 898-921.

Rajkumar C, Augustine AM, Lepcha A, Balraj A, Automated auditory brain stem response: Its efficacy as a screening tool for neonatal hearing screening in the post-natal ward. Indian J Otol. 2016;22:237-42.

Dhawan R, Mathur NN. Comparative evaluation of transient evoked oto-acoustic emissions and brainstem evoked response audiometry as screening modality for hearing impairment in neonates. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;59(1):15-8.

Vaid N. Neonatal hearing screening the Indian experience. Cochlear Implants Int. 2009;10:111-41.

Benito-Orejas JI, Morais RD, Almaraz A, Fernández-Calvo JL. Comparison of two-step transient evoked emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2007;59(1):15-8.

Yousefi J, Ajallouyean, M, Amirsalari M, Susan. Cochlear Implants. Iranian J. 2013;23(2):199-204.

Fa-Lin X, Qiu-Jing X, Xiu-Yong C, Zhongguo D, Zhi D. A comparison of auditory brainstem responses and oto acoustic emissions in hearing screening of high risk neonates. Chinese J Contemp Pediatr. 2008; 10(4):460-3.