Leif Hergils

This study analyses results from the first Swedish UNHS program. It includes over 33 000 measurement files from 14 287 children at two maternity wards. The screening program uses a two-stage TEOAE test procedure. A database was created in MedLog after data transformation in Word and Excel. The coverage rate was 99.1%. Bilateral pass rate after retesting was 97.0%. A unilateral pass criterion would have resulted in 1268 fewer children (9.0% of target group) for retesting and 231 fewer children (1.6% of target group) for diagnostic evaluation. When the first test was performed on the day the child was born, the pass rate was 64.8%; the pass rate increased to 89.2% when testing> or =3 days after birth. High coverage rates and pass rates were found to be possible, independent of the number of children born at the maternity ward. Learning curves were observed in the program with improvements distributed over time. Test performance was clearly better when the children were tested day two after birth or later.

This study addresses parental attitudes and concern in relation to universal neonatal hearing screening by otoacoustic emissions (OAE) testing. The parents of 87 children who had participated during the first year of the universal neonatal hearing screening programme at University Hospital, Linköping, Sweden were included in the study. These children were all tested during this period and later cared for at three well-baby clinics (part of their primary healthcare). A questionnaire was given to the parents during routine medical check-ups at the well-baby clinics when the infants were 5-6 months of age. Ninety-five per cent of parents stated that they had a positive attitude towards neonatal hearing screening, 1% were ambivalent and 4% were negative about it. The parents wanted early detection of hearing loss and the possibility of early intervention. It was also found that screening did not disturb the children. A few parents were anxious due to repeated testing of their children. The information provided in connection with the test was found to be sufficient by 77% of parents, whereas 11% of parents had negative comments about it (e.g. they wanted more information about the otoacoustic emissions technique). The general attitude among parents towards universal neonatal hearing screening was very positive in that they felt reassured by it. The risk of disturbing the parent-child relationship by early screening seems to be small, and could be further minimized by improved information and rapid and effective follow-up.