Hearing Loss in Newborns with Cleft Lip and/or Palate

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>This study aims to review the results of hearing screens in newborns with cleft deformities.</p><p><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b>A retrospective audit of 123 newborns with cleft deformities, born between 1 April 2002 and 1 December 2008, was conducted. Data on the results of universal newborn hearing screens (UNHS) and high-risk hearing screens, age at diagnosis, severity/type of hearing loss and mode of intervention were obtained from a prospectively maintained hearing database.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Thirty-one of 123 newborns (25.2%) failed the first automated auditory brainstem response (AABR). Seventy percent of infants (56 out of 80) who passed the UNHS failed the high-risk hearing screens which was conducted at 3 to 6 months of age. Otolaryngology referral rate was 67.5% (83/123); 90.3% of 31 newborns who failed the first AABR eventually required otolaryngology referrals. Incidence of hearing loss was 24.4% (30/123; 25 conductive, 2 mixed and 3 sensorineural), significantly higher than the hospital incidence of 0.3% (OR: 124.9, 95% CI, 81.1 to 192.4, P <0.01). In terms of severity, 8 were mild, 15 moderate, 5 severe, 2 profound. Eighteen out of 30 infants (60%) were detected from the high-risk hearing screens after passing the first AABR.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>These newborns had a higher risk of failing the UNHS and high-risk hearing screen. There was a higher incidence of hearing loss which was mainly conductive. Failure of the first AABR was an accurate predictor of an eventual otolaryngology referral, suggesting that a second AABR may be unnecessary. High-risk hearing screens helped to identify hearing loss which might have been missed out early on in life or which might have evolved later in infancy.</p>

High prevalence of hearing loss in Down syndrome at first year of life

<p><b>INTRODUCTION</b>Infants with Down syndrome (DS) are at higher risk of hearing loss (HL). Normal hearing at one year of age plays an important part in language development. An audit was conducted to determine the impact of the newborn hearing screening program on the incidence, type and timing of diagnosis of HL during first year of life.</p><p><b>MATERIALS AND METHODS</b>Infants with DS were scheduled for Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) within 4 weeks of life. If they passed, they had a high-risk screen at 3 to 6 months. They were referred to the otolaryngology department if they did not pass the UNHS or the high-risk screen. Information was obtained from the computerised data tracking system and case notes. Infants born from April 2002 to January 2005 and referred to the DS clinic of our hospital were analysed.</p><p><b>RESULTS</b>Thirty-seven (82.2%) of 45 infants underwent UNHS, of which 12 (32.4%) infants did not pass. Of remaining 33 infants, 27 had high-risk screen done of which 14 (51.8%) did not pass. Twenty-eight infants were referred to the ear, nose, throat (ENT) clinic: 12 from UNHS, 14 from high-risk screens and 2 from the DS clinic. Eleven (39.2%) defaulted follow-up. Fourteen (82.3%) of 17 infants who attended the ENT Clinic had HL. Twelve (85.7%) were conductive, and 2 (14.2%) mixed. Nine (64.2%) had mild-moderate HL and 3 (21%) had severe HL. The mean age of diagnosis was 6.6 ± 3.3 months. All were treated medically, plus surgically if indicated. By 12 months of age, the hearing had normalised in 4 (28.6%) infants and remained the same in 3 (21.4%). Five (35.7%) defaulted follow-up. Thirty-five out of 45 (77.8%) underwent complete hearing screen in the first year of life (UNHS & High-risk screen). Six out of 45 (13.3%) had incomplete screening. Fourteen out of 41 (34.1%) had HL of varying degrees. Four out of 45 (8.8%) did not have any audiological assessment in first year of life.</p><p><b>CONCLUSION</b>The incidence of HL in the first year of life was high (34.1%). Eighty-five percent were conductive with 64.2% in mild-moderate range. One third of infants hearing normalized after treatment, one third remained unaltered and one third of infants did not attend follow-up. An aggressive approach involving early screening after birth and continued surveillance and early referral to appropriate agencies are essential for establishing timely diagnosis and treatment. Measures to reduce the high default rate during long-term follow-up are needed. Parent education and integrated multidisciplinary follow-up clinic may be useful.</p>