A comparison of the human voice (“Baah”) test and the automated auditory brainstem response in detecting neonates with hearing loss in a community setting

Objective@#To assess the usage of the “Baah” Test compared to the AABR (Automated Auditory Brainstem Response) in detecting hearing loss of neonates in the community setting. @*Methods@#This is a retrospective cross-sectional study. The targeted sample population are infants less than a month old who underwent screening at a testing facility in Malolos, Bulacan spanning the years 2011 and 2012. @*Results@#A total of 201 infants were included in the study, with a mean age of 10.77 days with a standard deviation of 7.79. The ratio of males to females was almost equal at 1:1.01. For infants who passed hearing screening on at least one ear, 96% (193 infants) correlated with the results of “Baah” testing. For those with bilateral refer results on AABR, 4 out of the 6 correlated with the “Baah” Test. @*Conclusion@#There is potential in using the “Baah” Test as a tool for hearing loss assessment of infants in situations wherein the usual hearing screening tests are inaccessible. It makes use of little resources, and though it does have its limitations in assessing for unilateral hearing loss (as the test cannot test ears in isolation), it would be able to identify infants likely to have bilateral hearing loss.

Evaluation of the newborn hearing screening program in The Medical City based on Joint Commission on Infant Hearing (JCIH) 2007 position statement quality indicators

Objective@#The objective of this study is to evaluate the newborn hearing screening program in The Medical City based on the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing (JCIH) 2007 Position Statement Quality Indicators. @*Methods@#Study Design: Cross - Sectional Survey. Setting: Tertiary Private Hospital. Participants: All newborns who underwent newborn hearing screening in The Medical City for the year 2015. @*Results@#Of 2,010 patients delivered in the hospital in year 2015, 1,986 (98.8%) were screened. Among the 59 babies with initial “refer” results, 15 (25.42%) “referred” a second time while 24 (40.68%) “passed” the rescreening. Twenty (33.89%) did not undergo rescreening (10 were classified as dropouts, while another 10 did not undergo rescreening for various reasons. Of those who “referred” during rescreening, only 9 (60%) had further evaluation done with ABR/ASSR. Among these, 4 (26.66%) had hearing loss and proceeded with the appropriate monitoring and management while 5 (33.33%) had normal hearing. @*Conclusion@#The current newborn hearing screening program in the Medical City was able to reach JCIH 2007 quality indicators for screening but not for confirmation of hearing Loss. All patients with hearing loss were managed with early rehabilitation.