Literature DB >> 23803975

Improved newborn hearing screening follow-up results in more infants identified.

Suhana Alam1, Marcus Gaffney, John Eichwald.   

Abstract

Longitudinal research suggests that efforts at the national, state, and local levels are leading to improved follow-up and data reporting. Data now support the assumption that the number of deaf or hard-of-hearing infants identified through newborn hearing screening increases with a reduction in the number of infants lost to follow-up. Documenting the receipt of services has made a noticeable impact on reducing lost to follow-up rates and early identification of infants with hearing loss; however, continued improvement and monitoring of services are still needed.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 23803975      PMCID: PMC4470168          DOI: 10.1097/PHH.0b013e31829d7b57

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Public Health Manag Pract        ISSN: 1078-4659


  5 in total

1.  Year 2007 position statement: Principles and guidelines for early hearing detection and intervention programs.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2007-10       Impact factor: 7.124

Review 2.  Universal screening for hearing loss in newborns: US Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Pediatrics       Date:  2008-07       Impact factor: 7.124

3.  Measures of follow-up in early hearing detection and intervention programs: a need for standardization.

Authors:  Craig A Mason; Marcus Gaffney; Denise R Green; Scott D Grosse
Journal:  Am J Audiol       Date:  2008-06       Impact factor: 1.493

4.  Newborn hearing screening and follow-up: are children receiving recommended services?

Authors:  Marcus Gaffney; Denise R Green; Claudia Gaffney
Journal:  Public Health Rep       Date:  2010 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 2.792

Review 5.  Early identification of hearing impairment in infants and young children.

Authors: 
Journal:  NIH Consens Statement       Date:  1993 Mar 1-3
  5 in total
  5 in total

1.  Geographic and Racial Disparities in Infant Hearing Loss.

Authors:  Paul M Lantos; Gabriela Maradiaga-Panayotti; Xavier Barber; Eileen Raynor; Debara Tucci; Kate Hoffman; Sallie R Permar; Pearce Jackson; Brenna L Hughes; Amy Kind; Geeta K Swamy
Journal:  Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2018-10-09       Impact factor: 3.497

2.  Restructuring Data Reported from Jurisdictional Early Hearing Detection and Intervention (EHDI) Programs: A Pilot Study.

Authors:  Suhana Alam; Winnie Chung; Xidong Deng; Tammy O'Hollearn; Jim Beavers; Rebekah F Cunningham; Alyssa K Rex; ThuyQuynh N Do
Journal:  J Early Hear Detect Interv       Date:  2018

3.  Identification of oral clefts as a risk factor for hearing loss during newborn hearing screening.

Authors:  Patricia L Purcell; Kathleen Cy Sie; Todd C Edwards; Debra Lochner Doyle; Karin Neidt
Journal:  J Early Hear Detect Interv       Date:  2018

4.  Delayed diagnosis of a patient with Usher syndrome 1C in a Louisiana Acadian family highlights the necessity of timely genetic testing for the diagnosis and management of congenital hearing loss.

Authors:  Ayesha Umrigar; Amanda Musso; Danielle Mercer; Annette Hurley; Cassondra Glausier; Mona Bakeer; Michael Marble; Chindo Hicks; Fern Tsien
Journal:  SAGE Open Med Case Rep       Date:  2017-12-11

5.  Showing Value in Newborn Screening: Challenges in Quantifying the Effectiveness and Cost-Effectiveness of Early Detection of Phenylketonuria and Cystic Fibrosis.

Authors:  Scott D Grosse
Journal:  Healthcare (Basel)       Date:  2015-11-11
  5 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.