Monitoring COVID-19 in Belgian general practice: A tool for syndromic surveillance based on electronic health records.

BACKGROUND: COVID-19 may initially manifest as flu-like symptoms. As such, general practitioners (GPs) will likely to play an important role in monitoring the pandemic through syndromic surveillance. OBJECTIVES: To present a COVID-19 syndromic surveillance tool in Belgian general practices. METHODS: We performed a nationwide observational prospective study in Belgian general practices. The surveillance tool extracted the daily entries of diagnostic codes for COVID-19 and associated conditions (suspected or confirmed COVID-19, acute respiratory infection and influenza-like illness) from electronic medical records. We calculated the 7-day rolling average for these diagnoses and compared them with data from two other Belgian population-based sources (laboratory-confirmed new COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions for COVID-19), using time series analysis. We also collected data from users and stakeholders about the syndromic surveillance tool and performed a thematic analysis. RESULTS: 4773 out of 11,935 practising GPs in Belgium participated in the study. The curve of contacts for suspected COVID-19 followed a similar trend compared with the curves of the official data sources: laboratory-confirmed COVID-19 cases and hospital admissions but with a 10-day delay for the latter. Data were quickly available and useful for decision making, but some technical and methodological components can be improved, such as a greater standardisation between EMR software developers. CONCLUSION: The syndromic surveillance tool for COVID-19 in primary care provides rapidly available data useful in all phases of the COVID-19 pandemic to support data-driven decision-making. Potential enhancements were identified for a prospective surveillance tool.

Data extracted daily from electronic medical records can be used to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic in general practice.The Barometer provided rapidly available data to support data-driven decision-making.Improvements such as a greater standardisation were identified for a potential future tool using the same technology.

Trajectory of hearing loss in children with unilateral hearing loss.

Introduction: The aim of this study was to quantify the amount of deterioration in hearing and to document the trajectory of hearing loss in early identified children with unilateral hearing loss (UHL). We also examined whether clinical characteristics were associated with the likelihood of having progressive hearing loss. Methods: As part of the Mild and Unilateral Hearing Loss Study, we followed a population-based cohort of 177 children diagnosed with UHL from 2003 to 2018. We applied linear mixed models to examine hearing trends over time including the average amount of change in hearing. Logistic regression models were used to examine the relationship between age and severity at diagnosis, etiology, and the likelihood of progressive loss and amount of deterioration in hearing. Results: The median age of the children at diagnosis was 4.1 months (IQR 2.1, 53.9) and follow-up time was 58.9 months (35.6, 92.0). Average hearing loss in the impaired ear was 58.8 dB HL (SD 28.5). Over the 16-year period, 47.5% (84/177) of children showed deterioration in hearing in one or both ears from their initial diagnostic assessment to most recent assessment including 21 (11.9%) who developed bilateral hearing loss. Average deterioration in the impaired ear ranged from 27 to 31 dB with little variation across frequencies. Deterioration resulted in a change in category of severity for 67.5% (52/77) of the children. Analysis for children who were followed for at least 8 years showed that most lost a significant amount of hearing rapidly in the first 4 years, with the decrease stabilizing and showing a plateau in the last 4 years. Age and severity at diagnosis were not significantly associated with progressive/stable loss after adjusting for time since diagnosis. Etiologic factors (ENT external/middle ear anomalies, inner ear anomalies, syndromic hearing loss, hereditary/genetic) were found to be positively associated with stable hearing loss. Conclusion: Almost half of children with UHL are at risk for deterioration in hearing in one or both ears. Most deterioration occurs within the first 4 years following diagnosis. Most children did not experience sudden "large" drops in hearing but more gradual decrease over time. These results suggest that careful monitoring of UHL especially in the early years is important to ensure optimal benefit from early hearing loss detection.

Burden of COVID-19 on primary care in Belgium: a prospective nationwide observational study from March to August 2020.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 outbreak had an important impact on general practice, for example the lack of personal protective equipment (PPE) and the switch to telephone consultations. We installed a monitoring instrument and reported the burden the COVID-19 pandemic placed on Belgian general practitioners (GPs) during the first wave of the pandemic. METHODS: We conducted an observational longitudinal prospective study from the 19th of March until the 17th of August 2020. Daily data were collected by using a structured electronic form integrated into the GPs' electronic medical records (EMRs). Data were collected on the GPs' need for support and workload, epidemiological indicators and the availability of PPE. Reports with graphical presentations were made for GP circles and primary care zones, and governments of different administrative levels had access to all data to guide their policy. RESULTS: A total of 3.769 different GP centres participated, which included more than 10.000 GPs. Throughout the first three weeks, 20% declared they had insufficient resources (personnel and material) for the following week. Approximately 10% continued to report this during the entire study. The majority reported being able to complete their daily tasks without loss of quality. During the first week, 30% indicated an increased workload. Afterwards, this number decreased and stabilized to an average of 10-20%. More than 70% of the consultations in March 2020 were conducted by telephone. This percentage declined in April and stabilized at approximately 30% in June 2020. Consultations due to respiratory symptoms peaked at 4000/100,000 inhabitants at the beginning of the outbreak, then decreased over time along with the COVID-19 incidence. We noticed a lack of disinfectant hand gel, surgical masks and FFP2 masks, the latter remaining problematic in the long term. CONCLUSION: We introduced an instrument in Belgian EMR systems to monitor the burden on GPs during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. The lack of PPE and increased workload were considered to be the main obstacles. A large number of the GP offices switched to teleconsultations to provide healthcare. Our monitoring instrument provided information for policy makers to intervene on a local level.

Cytomegalovirus-A Risk Factor for Childhood Hearing Loss: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVE: Permanent hearing loss is an important public health issue in children with consequences for language, social, and academic functioning. Early hearing detection, intervention, and monitoring are important in mitigating the impact of permanent childhood hearing loss. Congenital cytomegalovirus (CMV) infection is a leading cause of hearing loss. The purpose of this review was to synthesize the evidence on the association between CMV infection and permanent childhood hearing loss. DESIGN: We performed a systematic review and examined scientific literature from the following databases: MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R), Embase, and CINAHL. The primary outcome was permanent bilateral or unilateral hearing loss with congenital onset or onset during childhood (birth to 18 years). The secondary outcome was progressive hearing loss. We included studies reporting data on CMV infection. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, nonrandomized comparative and noncomparative studies, and case series were considered. Data were extracted and the quality of individual studies was assessed with the Qualitative Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (McMaster University). The quality and strength of the evidence were graded using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). A narrative synthesis was completed. RESULTS: Sixty-five articles were included in the review. Prevalence of hearing loss at birth was over 33% among symptomatic CMV-infected newborns and less than 15% in asymptomatic infections. This difference in prevalence was maintained during childhood with more than 40% prevalence reported for symptomatic and less than 30% for asymptomatic CMV. Late-onset and progressive hearing loss appear to be characteristic of congenital CMV infections. Definitions of hearing loss, degree of loss, and reporting of laterality varied across studies. All degrees and both bilateral and unilateral loss were reported, regardless of symptomatic and asymptomatic status at birth, and no conclusions about the characteristics of hearing loss could be drawn. Various patterns of hearing loss were reported including stable, progressive, and fluctuating, and improvement in hearing (sometimes to normal hearing) was documented. These changes were reported in children with symptomatic/asymptomatic congenital CMV infection, presenting with congenital/early onset/late-onset hearing loss and in children treated and untreated with antiviral medication. CONCLUSIONS: Symptomatic and asymptomatic congenital CMV infection should be considered a risk factor for hearing loss at birth and during childhood and for progressive hearing loss. Therefore, CMV should be included as a risk factor in screening and surveillance programs and be taken into account in clinical follow-up of children with hearing loss.

Progressive Hearing Loss in Children With Mild Bilateral Hearing Loss.

Purpose This study investigated progressive hearing loss in a cohort of children who were identified with permanent mild bilateral hearing loss. Method This population-based study included 207 children with permanent mild bilateral hearing loss, diagnosed and followed from 2003 to 2016 in 1 region of Canada. Clinical characteristics and initial audiologic results were collected prospectively at diagnosis, and audiologic information was updated. Changes in hearing levels between the 1st and most recent assessment were analyzed to determine progressive hearing loss. Clinical characteristics were compared between children with progressive and stable hearing loss. The association between risk indicators and progressive hearing loss was explored through logistic regression. Results A total of 47.4% (94 of 207) had progressive hearing loss in at least 1 ear, and 50% (47 of 94) of those experienced more than 20-dB average drop in thresholds. For these 94 children, a total of 147 ears were affected, and 116 (78.9%) ears experienced sufficient change in thresholds to be coded as a worse category of hearing loss. In the subset of 85 children with more than 5 years of audiologic follow-up, 56.4% (53/85) showed a decrease in hearing. Of the total sample of 207 children, 137 (66.2%) continued to have mild hearing loss in the better ear. There was no association between the risk factors examined (family history of hearing loss, admission to the neonatal intensive care unit, or presence of a syndrome) and progressive hearing loss. Conclusion This study found that almost half of children with mild bilateral hearing loss showed a decrease in hearing in at least 1 ear. One third of the children first diagnosed with mild hearing loss in the better ear now have moderate or worse hearing loss in both ears. These findings point to the importance of careful long-term monitoring of children who present with mild hearing loss.

Risk factors for hearing loss in children: a systematic literature review and meta-analysis protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hearing loss in newborns and children is a public health concern, due to high prevalence and negative effects on their development. Early detection and intervention of childhood hearing loss may mitigate these negative effects. Population-based newborn hearing screening programs have been established worldwide to identify children at risk for congenital hearing loss and to follow children at risk for late onset or progressive hearing loss. This article presents the protocol for a systematic review that aims to review the risk factors associated with permanent hearing loss in children, including congenital, early, or late onset. Risk factors associated with progressive hearing loss will be investigated as a secondary aim. METHODS: Scientific literature from the following databases will be investigated: MEDLINE, Ovid MEDLINE(R) Daily and Ovid MEDLINE(R), Embase, and CINAHL. The primary outcome is a permanent bilateral or unilateral hearing loss with congenital onset or onset during childhood (birth to 18 years). The secondary outcome is progressive hearing loss. Studies must report data on risk factors associated with permanent hearing loss; risk factors may be present at birth or later and result in immediate or delayed hearing loss. Randomized controlled trials, quasi-experimental studies, nonrandomized comparative and non-comparative studies, and case series will be included. The risk of bias will be assessed using the Qualitative Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies (McMaster University). If aggregation of data is possible for a subsection of studies, we will pool data using meta-analysis techniques. If aggregation of data is not possible, a qualitative synthesis will be presented. We will assess the quality and strength of the overall body of evidence using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). The systematic review follows the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) recommendations. DISCUSSION: The resulting information will inform the update of a provincial audiological surveillance protocol for the Ontario Infant Hearing Program and will be applicable to early hearing detection and intervention (EHDI) programs worldwide. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: We have registered the protocol in the International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews (PROSPERO), registration number CRD42018104121.

Improving early audiological intervention via newborn hearing screening in Belgium.

BACKGROUND: Newborn hearing screening programs aim to lower the ages at audiological intervention among hearing-impaired children. In Wallonia and Brussels (Belgium), audiological intervention data are not collected in the screening program, and the ages at initiating audiological care have never been assessed. This study aimed to assess the evolution in the ages at initiating audiological intervention in the context of a newborn hearing screening program implementation. METHODS: This population-based descriptive study used data from the Belgian healthcare billing database. The main outcomes were the children's ages at the initial audiological assessment, hearing-aid fitting, and cochlear implantation. Results were compared to the same outcomes from another Belgian regional program (Flanders) that was implemented one decade earlier. Annual birth cohorts from 2006 to 2011 were included in the study. RESULTS: In Wallonia-Brussels, the median ages for all outcomes tended to decrease over time but remained higher than in Flanders for each birth cohort. For all outcomes except the hearing-aid fitting, differences in median ages between the two regions became less pronounced during the study period. In 2006, < 23% of the children from Wallonia-Brussels received any audiological care before the age of 12 months and these proportions were approximately 2-fold greater in the subsequent birth cohorts. For all outcomes, early care (< 12 months) was typically delivered less frequently in Wallonia-Brussels, compared to the delivery in Flanders. These region-specific differences exhibited a decreasing trend over time, and statistically significant differences were less common in the later birth cohorts. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the hearing screening program in Wallonia and Brussels promoted earlier audiological intervention among hearing-impaired children. However, milestones recommended by experts for an early intervention were not totally encountered. We also recommend collecting audiological intervention data as part of this program, which can facilitate more accurate and regular program evaluation.

Organisation of newborn hearing screening programmes in the European Union: widely implemented, differently performed.

BACKGROUND: Implementation of newborn hearing screening programmes is widely recommended and programme organisational designs may differ in practice. The objective of this article was to establish an overview of the newborn hearing screening programmes in the 28 countries of the European Union on four topics (policy-decision, financing, general designs, organisational features). METHODS: National or regional programme coordinators completed an online self-administered questionnaire focusing on protocol description and programme organisation. RESULTS: Thirty-nine key informants, representing 24 countries, from national or regional levels completed the questionnaire. Newborn hearing screening programmes are or will be shortly implemented largely in the European Union countries. Levels of policy decision-making and organisational decisions are diverse (national, regional or combined). Designs of the programmes (number of steps before diagnosis referral, single or dual target group protocol) highly varied. However, common organisational elements were observed: hearing screening tests are often performed by nursing staff, in hospitals and early in life. This pattern does not apply when a screening protocol is specifically implemented for newborns with risk factor(s) for hearing impairment or admitted to neonatal intensive care units. Hearing test financing frequently involved public sources, including government and public health funds. CONCLUSION: Despite the same goal of early identification of hearing-impaired children, there is a high level of diversity in programmes, including policy decisions, financing, general designs and pragmatic organisational choices (e.g. professionals involved, location or time for screening, number of steps in the protocol). Further investigations should analyse these differences in relation to the programmes' contexts and outcomes.

Newborn hearing screening programme in Belgium: a consensus recommendation on risk factors.

BACKGROUND: Understanding the risk factors for hearing loss is essential for designing the Belgian newborn hearing screening programme. Accordingly, they needed to be updated in accordance with current scientific knowledge. This study aimed to update the recommendations for the clinical management and follow-up of newborns with neonatal risk factors of hearing loss for the newborn screening programme in Belgium. METHODS: A literature review was performed, and the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system assessment method was used to determine the level of evidence quality and strength of the recommendation for each risk factor. The state of scientific knowledge, levels of evidence quality, and graded recommendations were subsequently assessed using a three-round Delphi consensus process (two online questionnaires and one face-to-face meeting). RESULTS: Congenital infections (i.e., cytomegalovirus, toxoplasmosis, and syphilis), a family history of hearing loss, consanguinity in (grand)parents, malformation syndromes, and foetal alcohol syndrome presented a 'high' level of evidence quality as neonatal risk factors for hearing loss. Because of the sensitivity of auditory function to bilirubin toxicity, hyperbilirubinaemia was assessed at a 'moderate' level of evidence quality. In contrast, a very low birth weight, low Apgar score, and hospitalisation in the neonatal intensive care unit ranged from 'very low' to 'low' levels, and ototoxic drugs were evidenced as 'very low'. Possible explanations for these 'very low' and 'low' levels include the improved management of these health conditions or treatments, and methodological weaknesses such as confounding effects, which make it difficult to conclude on individual risk factors. In the recommendation statements, the experts emphasised avoiding unidentified neonatal hearing loss and opted to include risk factors for hearing loss even in cases with weak evidence. The panel also highlighted the cumulative effect of risk factors for hearing loss. CONCLUSIONS: We revised the recommendations for the clinical management and follow-up of newborns exhibiting neonatal risk factors for hearing loss on the basis of the aforementioned evidence-based approach and clinical experience from experts. The next step is the implementation of these findings in the Belgian screening programme.

Main outcomes of a newborn hearing screening program in Belgium over six years.

OBJECTIVE: To present the outcomes of the newborn hearing screening program in Belgium (French-speaking area) since its implementation and to analyze its evolution between 2007 and 2012 in the neonatal population without reported risk factors for hearing loss. METHODS: The study was descriptive and based on a retrospective analysis of six annual databases (2007-2012) from the newborn hearing screening program. The main outcomes were identified: prevalence of reported hearing impairment; coverage rates (first and second test, follow-up); proportions of conclusive screening tests; referral rate. Each outcome was presented for the six years and by year of birth. Chi-squares were used to study differences in the various outcomes according to time. RESULTS: Over the six years, 264,508 newborns were considered as eligible for the screening. Hearing impairment was confirmed in 1.41‰ (n = 374) of them, with significant disparities from year to year, between 0.67‰ and 1.94‰. Analysis of the screening process showed that only 92.71% (n = 245,219) of the eligible newborns underwent a first hearing test. This coverage rate varied greatly over time: at the beginning, less than 90% of the newborns had a first test and it rose to almost 95%. After the two screening steps, 2.40% (n = 6340) of the newborns were referred to an ENT doctor; the referral rate slightly decreased during the first years of the program and then stabilized around 2.4%. Over the period, only 62.21% of the referred newborns had a follow-up; the follow-up rate was particularly low for the first year (44.91%) and then strongly increased (+19.52% in 2008) but never exceeded 70%. CONCLUSIONS: Outcome measures for the newborn hearing screening program in Belgium are lower than the benchmarks released by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing. Nevertheless, the evolution of the outcome measures since the implementation of the program has been positive, particularly during the first years. At some point, most of the outcome measures decreased or at least did not change any further. The motivation and commitment of the professionals have to be supported in a variety of ways to improve outcome measures and thus, the quality of the program.

Putting newborn hearing screening on the political agenda in Belgium: local initiatives toward a community programme - a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: The Kingdon model, based on the convergence of three streams (problem, policy, and politics) and the opening of a policy window, analyses the process by which a health issue is placed on the political agenda. We used this model to document the political agenda-setting process of the newborn hearing screening programme in Belgium. METHODS: A qualitative study based on a document review and on semi-directed interviews was carried out. The interviews were conducted with nine people who had played a role in putting the issue in question on the political agenda, and the documents reviewed included scientific literature and internal reports and publications from the newborn hearing screening programme. The thematic analysis of the data collected was carried out on the basis of the Kingdon model's three streams. RESULTS: The political agenda-setting of this screening programme was based on many factors. The problem stream included factors external to the context under study, such as the technological developments and the contribution of the scientific literature which led to the recommendation to provide newborn hearing screening. The two other streams (policy and politics) covered factors internal to the Belgian context. The fact that it was locally feasible with financial support, the network of doctors convinced of the need for newborn hearing screening, the drafting of various proposals, and the search for financing were all part of the policy stream. The Belgian political context and the policy opportunities concerning preventive medicine were identified as significant factors in the third stream. When these three streams converged, a policy window opened, allowing newborn hearing screening onto the political agenda and enabling the policy decision for its introduction. CONCLUSIONS: The advantage of applying the Kingdon model in our approach was the ability to demonstrate the political agenda-setting process, using the three streams. This made it possible to identify the many factors involved in the process. However, the roles of the stakeholders and of the context were somewhat inexplicit in this model.