Universal Newborn Hearing Screening introduced to NICU infants in Canterbury Province, New Zealand

New Zealand Medical Journal

Volumn 117, Issue 1206, 2004, Pages

  Flynn, Mark C ^a,c   Austin, Nicola ^b   Flynn, Traci Schmidtke ^a   Ford, Rodney P K ^b   Buckland, Liz ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF CANTERBURY   (New Zealand)

^b CANTERBURY DISTRICT HEALTH BOARD   (New Zealand)

^c OTICON A S   (Denmark)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CLINICAL ARTICLE; CLINICAL PRACTICE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; EARLY DIAGNOSIS; EVOKED BRAIN STEM AUDITORY RESPONSE; FEASIBILITY STUDY; HEARING LOSS; HEARING TEST; HOSPITAL SERVICE; HUMAN; INFORMATION PROCESSING; NEW ZEALAND; NEWBORN; NEWBORN INTENSIVE CARE; NEWBORN SCREENING; PATIENT REFERRAL; PREDICTION; RISK ASSESSMENT; RISK FACTOR; STANDARDIZATION; COST; ECONOMICS; ETHNOLOGY; EVALUATION; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HOSPITAL; PILOT STUDY; SPONTANEOUS OTOACOUSTIC EMISSION;

COSTS AND COST ANALYSIS; EVOKED POTENTIALS, AUDITORY, BRAIN STEM; HEALTH PLAN IMPLEMENTATION; HEARING LOSS; HEARING TESTS; HOSPITALS, MATERNITY; HUMANS; INFANT, NEWBORN; NEONATAL SCREENING; NEW ZEALAND; OTOACOUSTIC EMISSIONS, SPONTANEOUS; PILOT PROJECTS; RISK FACTORS;

EID: 16644388963     PISSN: 11758716     EISSN: 11758716     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (22)

1. Mauk GW, Behrens TR. Historical, political, and technological context associated with early identification of hearing loss. Seminars in Hearing. 1993;14:1-17.
2. Carney AE, Moeller MP. Treatment efficacy: Hearing loss in children. Journal of Speech, Language and Hearing Research. 1998;41:S61-S84.
3. Yoshinaga-Itano C, Apuzzo ML. The development of deaf and hard of hearing children identified early through the high-risk registry. American Annal of the Deaf. 1998;143:416-24.
4. Yoshinaga-Itano C, Sedey AL, Coulter DK, Mehl AL. Language of early- and later-identified children with hearing loss. Pediatrics. 1998;102:1161-71.
5. National Audiology Centre. New Zealand deafness notification data: January-December 2002. Auckland: National Audiology Centre; 2003.
6. Davis A, Bamford J, Wilson I, Ramkalawan T, Forshaw M, Wright S. A critical review of the role of neonatal hearing screening in the detection of congenital hearing impairment. Health Technology Assessment. 1997;1:1-177.
7. Friedland DR, Fahs MC, Catalano PJ. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the high risk register and auditory brainstem response. International Journal of Pediatric Otorhinolaryngology. 1996;38:115-30.
8. Mauk GW, White KR, Mortensen LB, Behrens TR. The effectiveness of screening programs based on high-risk characteristics in early identification of hearing impairment. Ear and Hearing. 1999:312-9.
9. White KR, Vohr BR, Behrens TR. Universal newborn hearing screening using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions: Results of the Rhode Island hearing assessment project. Seminars in Hearing. 1993;14:18-29.
10. Hayes D, Northern JL. Infants and Hearing. San Diego (CA): Singular Press; 1996.
11. 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.
12. White KR. Universal newborn hearing screening using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions: Past, present, and future. Seminars in Hearing. 1996;17:171-83.
13. Eden D, Ford RP, Hunter MF, et al. Audiological screening of neonatal intensive care unit graduates at high risk of sensorineural hearing loss. N Z Med J. 2000;113:182-3.
14. Maxon AB, White KR, Behrens TR, Vohr BR. Referral rates and cost efficiency in a universal newborn hearing screening program using transient evoked otoacoustic emissions. J Am Acad Audiol. 1995;6:271-7.
15. Controlled trial of universal neonatal screening for early identification of permanent childhood hearing impairment. Wessex Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening Trial Group. Lancet. 1998;352:1957-64.
16. Clemens CJ, Davis SA. Minimizing false-positives in universal newborn hearing screening: a simple solution. Pediatrics. 2001;107:E29.
17. Statistics New Zealand. 2001 Census of Population and Dwellings. Wellington: Statistics New Zealand; 2002.
18. Bess FH, Paradise JL. Universal hearing screening for infant hearing impairment: not simple, not risk free, not necessarily beneficial, and not presently justified. Paediatrics.1994;93:330-4.
19. Watkin PM, Baldwin M, Dixon R, Beckman A. Maternal anxiety and attitudes to universal neonatal hearing screening. Br J Audiol.1998;32:27-37.
20. Year 2000 position statement: principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs. Joint Committee on Infant Hearing, American Academy of Audiology, American Academy of Pediatrics, American Speech-Language-Hearing Association, and Directors of Speech and Hearing Programs in State Health and Welfare Agencies. Pediatrics 2000;106:798-817.
21. Mehl AL, Thomson V. Newborn hearing screening: the great omission. Pediatrics. 1998;101:E4.
22. Flynn MC, Pope B. New acoustical measures for the early detection of deafness in newborn babies. NZ Acoustics. 2001;14:32-37.