Outcomes with OAE and AABR screening in the first 48 h--Implications for newborn hearing screening in developing...

Early discharge of newborns (<24h after birth) from birthing centres is an important barrier to successful newborn hearing screening (NHS) in developing countries. This study evaluated the outcome of NHS within the first 48 h using an automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) device without the need for costly disposables typically required, and transient evoked otoacoustic emissions (TEOAE).

NHS was performed on 150 healthy newborns (300 ears) with TEOAE and AABR techniques before discharge at a hospital. A three-stage screening protocol was implemented consisting of an initial screen with TEOAE (GSI AUDIOscreener+) and AABR (BERAphone(®) MB 11). Infants were screened at several time points as early as possible after birth. Infants were only re-screened if either screening technique (TEOAE or AABR) initially yielded a refer outcome. The same audiologist performed all TEOAE and AABR screenings.

Over the three-stage screen AABR had a significantly lower refer rate of 16.7% (24/144 subjects) compared to TEOAE (37.9%; 55/145 subjects). Screening refer rate showed a progressive decrease with increasing age. For both TEOAE and AABR, refer rate per ear screened 24h post birth was significantly lower than for those screened before 24h. For infants screened before 12h post birth, the AABR refer rate per ear (51.1%) was significantly lower than the TEOAE refer rate (68.9%). Overall AABR refer rate per ear was similar for infants screened between 24 to 36 h (20.2%) and 36 to 48 h (18.9%) but significantly lower than for TEOAE (40.7% and 41.9%, respectively). Lowest initial refer rates per ear (TEOAE 25.8%, AABR 3.2%) were obtained after 48 h post birth.

In light of the early post birth discharge typical in developing countries like South Africa, in-hospital screening with AABR technology is significantly more effective than TEOAEs. AABR screening with a device like the MB 11 is particularly appropriate because disposable costs are negligible.