OBJECTIVE: The present study investigates whether general practitioner (GP) consultation initiated by failing the population hearing screening at age nine months or GP consultation because of parental concern over ear/hearing problems was more important in deciding on referral and/or surgical treatment of otitis media (OM). DESIGN: A questionnaire covering the history between birth and 21 months of age was used to obtain information on referral after failing the hearing screening, GP consultations for ear/hearing problems, and subsequent referral to a specialist and possible surgical treatment at an ENT department. SETTING: The province of Limburg, the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Healthy infants invited for the hearing screening at age nine months, who responded in an earlier study called PEPPER (Persistent Ear Problems, Providing Evidence for Referral, response rate 58%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The odds of a child being surgically treated for OM. RESULTS: The response rate for the present questionnaire was 72%. Of all children tested, 3.9% failed the hearing screening and were referred to their GP. Of all 2619 children in this study, 18.6% visited their GP with ear/hearing problems. Children failing the hearing screening without GP consultation for ear/hearing problems were significantly more often treated surgically for OM than children passing the hearing screening but with GP consultation for ear/hearing problems. CONCLUSION: Objectified hearing loss, i.e. failing the hearing screening, was important in the decision for surgical treatment in infants in the Netherlands.
OBJECTIVE: The present study investigates whether general practitioner (GP) consultation initiated by failing the population hearing screening at age nine months or GP consultation because of parental concern over ear/hearing problems was more important in deciding on referral and/or surgical treatment of otitis media (OM). DESIGN: A questionnaire covering the history between birth and 21 months of age was used to obtain information on referral after failing the hearing screening, GP consultations for ear/hearing problems, and subsequent referral to a specialist and possible surgical treatment at an ENT department. SETTING: The province of Limburg, the Netherlands. SUBJECTS: Healthy infants invited for the hearing screening at age nine months, who responded in an earlier study called PEPPER (Persistent Ear Problems, Providing Evidence for Referral, response rate 58%). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The odds of a child being surgically treated for OM. RESULTS: The response rate for the present questionnaire was 72%. Of all children tested, 3.9% failed the hearing screening and were referred to their GP. Of all 2619 children in this study, 18.6% visited their GP with ear/hearing problems. Children failing the hearing screening without GP consultation for ear/hearing problems were significantly more often treated surgically for OM than children passing the hearing screening but with GP consultation for ear/hearing problems. CONCLUSION: Objectified hearing loss, i.e. failing the hearing screening, was important in the decision for surgical treatment in infants in the Netherlands.
Authors: J L Paradise; H E Rockette; D K Colborn; B S Bernard; C G Smith; M Kurs-Lasky; J E Janosky Journal: Pediatrics Date: 1997-03 Impact factor: 7.124