[Analysis of TEOAE and AABR hearing screening and follow-up in NICU].

OBJECTIVE: To study the results of TEOAE and AABR hearing screening and follow-up in NICU. METHOD: Total 574 cases in NICU were included in this study, all cases received both TEOAE and AABR hearing screening while admission and rescreening when one-month-old. The cases that were abnormal on either test in rescreening were asked to return for diagnostic tests at 3 moths old. The patients who didn't return as required in 3 months were surveyed by call and analyzed. RESULT: Among 574 cases, 472 cases passed both TEOAE and AABR hearing screening while admission. While 102 cases had abnormal test results in either screening test. Thirty-three cases returned for follow-up, 13 of which passed rescreening test one month after discharge, the other 20 cases had ABR diagnostic tests after 3 months. Among them, 8 cases had normal hearing, 12 cases had various degree of hearing loss. Sixty-nine cases lost follow-up. The reason of lost follow-up was as follows, parents changed phone number/contact information, parents didn't understand the screening results, parents believe that their children having no need for further testing; parents had retest in other hospitals, parents didn't pay attention to hearing loss because of other severe complicated comorbidities. CONCLUSION: The passing rate (normal) of TEOAE and AABR hearing screening in NICU was 82.2%, non- passing rate wass 17.8%, and the prevalence of hearing loss was high in those followed cases. Hyperbilirubinemia was the main risk factors of hearing loss in our NICU patients. We reviewed the reason for high rate (67.6%) of losing follow-up.

[Second hearing screening model in neonates who failed the first screening].

OBJECTIVE: To study the significance of the second hearing screening in neonates who failed the first screening during their hospital stay. METHODS: Screening TEOAE tests were employed in 3849 neonates. The first screen was 3 days after birth. Those who failed were rescreened before discharge (5 - 7 days after birth). Neonates who failed the second screening would have a third screening in 30 - 42 days. Four types of rates were compared: pass rates of three times, rates of single ear fail and double ear fail, pass rates of left ear and right ear, pass rates of Caesarean birth and that of natural labor. RESULTS: The difference between rates of first time and second time is statistically significant (χ(2) = 38.67, P < 0.01). There is no statistically difference between the total pass rate in ward and that of third time (χ(2) = 2.73, P > 0.05). The pass rate of single ear fail is higher than that of double ears (χ(2) = 34.34, P < 0.01, the difference has statistical significance). The pass rate of left ear is higher than that of right ear (χ(2) = 0.62, P > 0.05, the difference has not statistical significance). The first time screen result showed pass rates of natural labor is higher than that of Caesarean birth (χ(2) = 35.37, P < 0.05), but the differences of pass rates of the second and third time between two delivery method was no statistical significance (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Two times of screening in ward could decrease false negative and refer rate, thus relieve parent's mental burden.