Literature DB >> 20148257

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

Luca Guastini1, Renzo Mora, Massimo Dellepiane, Valentina Santomauro, Massimiliano Mora, Antonio Rocca, Angelo Salami.   

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.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20148257     DOI: 10.1007/s00405-010-1209-z

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol        ISSN: 0937-4477            Impact factor:   2.503


  23 in total

1.  Success rate of newborn and follow-up screening of hearing using otoacoustic emissions.

Authors:  Stavros G Korres; Dimitrios G Balatsouras; Eleni Gkoritsa; Panayotis Eliopoulos; Efstathios Rallis; Eleftherios Ferekidis
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2005-11-28       Impact factor: 1.675

2.  MB11 BERAphone and auditory brainstem response in newborns at audiologic risk: comparison of results.

Authors:  Andrea Melagrana; Sara Casale; Maria Grazia Calevo; Vincenzo Tarantino
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2007-05-29       Impact factor: 1.675

3.  Optimizing otoacoustic emission protocols for a UNHS program.

Authors:  S Hatzopoulos; J Petruccelli; A Ciorba; A Martini
Journal:  Audiol Neurootol       Date:  2008-07-29       Impact factor: 1.854

4.  Comparison of hearing screening programs between one step with transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and two steps with TEOAE and automated auditory brainstem response.

Authors:  Hung-Ching Lin; Min-Tsan Shu; Kuo-Sheng Lee; Guan-Min Ho; Tzu-Yu Fu; Sharon Bruna; Grace Lin
Journal:  Laryngoscope       Date:  2005-11       Impact factor: 3.325

5.  reducing false positives in newborn hearing screening program: how and why.

Authors:  Hung-Ching Lin; Min-Tsan Shu; Kuo-Sheng Lee; Huang-Yu Lin; Grace Lin
Journal:  Otol Neurotol       Date:  2007-09       Impact factor: 2.311

6.  Prevalence and independent risk factors for hearing loss in NICU infants.

Authors:  Elysée T M Hille; Hlm Irma van Straaten; Paul H Verkerk
Journal:  Acta Paediatr       Date:  2007-08       Impact factor: 2.299

Review 7.  Hearing impairment in children.

Authors:  Bharti Katbamna; Teresa Crumpton; Dilip R Patel
Journal:  Pediatr Clin North Am       Date:  2008-10       Impact factor: 3.278

8.  Comparison of currently available devices designed for newborn hearing screening using automated auditory brainstem and/or otoacoustic emission measurements.

Authors:  S Meier; O Narabayashi; R Probst; N Schmuziger
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2004-07       Impact factor: 1.675

Review 9.  Maturation and plasticity of the central auditory system.

Authors:  Robert-Benjamin Illing
Journal:  Acta Otolaryngol Suppl       Date:  2004-05

10.  Comparison of two-step transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for universal newborn hearing screening programs.

Authors:  J I Benito-Orejas; B Ramírez; D Morais; A Almaraz; J L Fernández-Calvo
Journal:  Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol       Date:  2008-06-12       Impact factor: 1.675

View more
  4 in total

1.  [Pedaudiological diagnostics in the first year of life . Clinical follow-up, risk factors, and middle ear function].

Authors:  J W Rumstadt; A am Zehnhoff-Dinnesen; A Knief; D Deuster; P Matulat; K Rosslau; C-M Schmidt
Journal:  HNO       Date:  2012-10       Impact factor: 1.284

Review 2.  Evaluating reporting and process quality of publications on UNHS: a systematic review of programmes.

Authors:  Pierpaolo Mincarone; Carlo Giacomo Leo; Saverio Sabina; Daniele Costantini; Francesco Cozzolino; John B Wong; Giuseppe Latini
Journal:  BMC Pediatr       Date:  2015-07-22       Impact factor: 2.125

3.  Neonatal hearing screening in remote areas of China: a comparison between rural and urban populations.

Authors:  Wu Wenjin; Tang Xiangrong; Li Yun; Lü Jingrong; Chen Jianyong; Wang Xueling; Huang Zhiwu; Wu Hao
Journal:  J Int Med Res       Date:  2017-06-12       Impact factor: 1.671

4.  Feasibility of newborn hearing screening in a public hospital setting in South Africa: A pilot study.

Authors:  Amisha Kanji; Katijah Khoza-Shangase
Journal:  S Afr J Commun Disord       Date:  2016-07-21
  4 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.