Lucia Jane Scheepers1, De Wet Swanepoel2, Talita le Roux1. 1. Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, University of Pretoria, South Africa. 2. Department of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology, University of Pretoria, South Africa; Ear Sciences Centre, School of Surgery, University of Western Australia, Nedlands, Australia; Ear Science Institute Australia, Subiaco, Australia. Electronic address: dewet.swanepoel@up.ac.za.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: This study describes screen refusal and follow-up default characteristics together with caregiver reasons for screen refusal and follow-up default in two South African universal newborn hearing screening programs. METHODS: A retrospective record review of universal newborn hearing screening conducted at two hospitals (Hospital A n = 954 infants; Hospital B n = 2135) over a 31-33 month period. Otoacoustic emission screening was conducted with rescreen recommended within six weeks for a uni- or bilateral refer. Program efficacy was described according to coverage, referral and follow-up rates. A prospective telephonic interview with caregivers who declined the initial screen (n = 25) and who defaulted on follow-up (n = 25) constituted the next study component. Caregivers were randomly selected from the screening programs for a survey related to reasons for newborn hearing screening refusal and follow-up default. RESULTS: Screening coverage (89.3% Hospital A; 57.4% Hospital B), initial referral rates (11.6% Hospital A; 21.2% Hospital B) and follow-up return rates (56.1% Hospital A; 35.8% Hospital B) differed significantly between hospitals and were below benchmarks. The most frequent reasons for screen refusal were related to costs (72%), caregiver knowledge of newborn hearing screening (64%) and health care professional knowledge and team collaboration (16%). Almost all caregivers (96%) indicated that if costs had been included in the birthing package or covered by medical insurance they would have agreed to newborn hearing screening. Reasons for follow-up default were most commonly related to caregiver knowledge of newborn hearing screening (32%) and costs (28%). One in four caregivers (24%) defaulted on follow-up because they forgot to bring their infant for a rescreen. Only half of caregivers (48%) who defaulted on follow-up reported being aware of initial screen results while 60% reported being aware of the recommended follow-up rescreen. CONCLUSION: Caregivers most commonly refused screening due to associated costs and mostly defaulted on follow-up due to an apparent lack of knowledge regarding initial screen outcome and recommendations made for follow-up. Including NHS as a mandated birthing service is essential if coverage is to be increased, while reducing follow-up defaults requires proactive reminders and improved communication with caregivers.
OBJECTIVES: This study describes screen refusal and follow-up default characteristics together with caregiver reasons for screen refusal and follow-up default in two South African universal newborn hearing screening programs. METHODS: A retrospective record review of universal newborn hearing screening conducted at two hospitals (Hospital A n = 954 infants; Hospital B n = 2135) over a 31-33 month period. Otoacoustic emission screening was conducted with rescreen recommended within six weeks for a uni- or bilateral refer. Program efficacy was described according to coverage, referral and follow-up rates. A prospective telephonic interview with caregivers who declined the initial screen (n = 25) and who defaulted on follow-up (n = 25) constituted the next study component. Caregivers were randomly selected from the screening programs for a survey related to reasons for newborn hearing screening refusal and follow-up default. RESULTS: Screening coverage (89.3% Hospital A; 57.4% Hospital B), initial referral rates (11.6% Hospital A; 21.2% Hospital B) and follow-up return rates (56.1% Hospital A; 35.8% Hospital B) differed significantly between hospitals and were below benchmarks. The most frequent reasons for screen refusal were related to costs (72%), caregiver knowledge of newborn hearing screening (64%) and health care professional knowledge and team collaboration (16%). Almost all caregivers (96%) indicated that if costs had been included in the birthing package or covered by medical insurance they would have agreed to newborn hearing screening. Reasons for follow-up default were most commonly related to caregiver knowledge of newborn hearing screening (32%) and costs (28%). One in four caregivers (24%) defaulted on follow-up because they forgot to bring their infant for a rescreen. Only half of caregivers (48%) who defaulted on follow-up reported being aware of initial screen results while 60% reported being aware of the recommended follow-up rescreen. CONCLUSION: Caregivers most commonly refused screening due to associated costs and mostly defaulted on follow-up due to an apparent lack of knowledge regarding initial screen outcome and recommendations made for follow-up. Including NHS as a mandated birthing service is essential if coverage is to be increased, while reducing follow-up defaults requires proactive reminders and improved communication with caregivers.
Authors: James E Saunders; Sarah Bessen; Isabelle Magro; Devin Cowan; Marvin Gonzalez Quiroz; Karen Mojica-Alvarez; Donoso Penalba; Catherine Reike; Christopher E Niemczak; Abigail Fellows; Jay C Buckey Journal: J Glob Health Date: 2022-08-09 Impact factor: 7.664
Authors: Allison R Mackey; Andrea M L Bussé; Valeria Del Vecchio; Elina Mäki-Torkko; Inger M Uhlén Journal: BMC Pediatr Date: 2022-08-05 Impact factor: 2.567