BACKGROUND:  Targeted new-born hearing screening, based on high risk factors is recommended in the absence of universal new-born hearing screening in resource-constrained settings. The relevance of risk factors listed in the guidelines of high-income countries and used by low-middle income countries remains relatively unknown. Risk factors consistent with the epidemiological profile, evolution of risks and disease burden in these countries need to be considered.
OBJECTIVE:  This study aimed to profile the frequency of risk factors and their manifestation in hearing outcomes of young children in the KwaZulu-Natal province of South Africa.
METHODS:  A chart review of N = 1433 patients\' archival audiology records was conducted, conveniently sampled from a single tertiary hospital (n = 351), a provincial assessment and therapy centre (n = 649), a university clinic (n = 291), and two schools for the deaf (n = 142).
RESULTS:  Overall, 56% of the participants presented with either a conductive, sensorineural or a mixed hearing loss; 62% of the children had between 1 and 2 risk factors present (Mean [M] = 1.1; standard deviation [s.d.] = 0.98). Admission to neonatal intensive care unit, maternal infections, bacterial and viral infections and chemotherapy, from the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing list of high risk factors were significantly associated with hearing loss (p  0.05). Known non-JCIH risks, emerging risks and other statistically significant contextually relevant risk factors were also noted.
CONCLUSIONS:  Understanding the profile of high risk factors in a given context has implications for prevention, early hearing identification and intervention services.Contribution: Targeted new-born hearing screening needs to be based on risk factors that are contextually relevant. This study is one of the first profiling high risk factors for hearing loss in children in KZN, the province with the second highest population in South Africa.

BACKGROUND:  Childhood hearing loss is a global health concern. Despite the proven benefits of neonatal hearing screening (NHS), it is not yet mandated in South Africa. The lack of awareness of hearing loss and absence of NHS leads to delayed diagnosis and adverse developmental outcomes for affected children.
OBJECTIVE:  The study aimed to assess the availability of NHS services across primary healthcare (PHC) facilities in the City of Cape Town (CCT).
METHODS:  Surveys were conducted with 26 PHC facilities in the CCT metropolitan areas that offer mother and child healthcare services.
METHODS:  Surveys gathered data through online and telephone methods. The surveys aimed to assess the availability and nature of NHS services, care pathways and training of healthcare professionals regarding NHS.
RESULTS:  None of the facilities used objective screening methods to screen hearing or have standardised care pathways for at-risk babies. Instead, they relied on parental concerns, with the use of the Road to Health book. None of the respondents reported having received hearing screening training, and the majority of participants (62%) lacked confidence in their knowledge of ear and hearing care.
CONCLUSIONS:  The absence of NHS services highlights the need for standardised protocols and increased awareness among healthcare workers and caregivers. Implementing NHS services could facilitate earlier diagnosis and intervention of hearing loss for infants in the Western Cape.Contribution: This study\'s findings could guide efforts to improving access to NHS access at PHC level in Cape Town, ultimately providing early hearing screening services to infants.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze the performance of a leading institution in implementing newborn hearing screening and address two key areas: the knowledge gap in screening practice and the prevalence of permanent sensorineural hearing loss in Saudi Arabia.
METHODS: We analyzed the prevalence of hearing impairment in all live births at King Fahad Hospital of the University, Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia, from September 2018 to June 2022. Automated auditory brainstem response was used for both initial screening and rescreening. Newborns who failed the rescreening underwent a diagnostic evaluation. We assessed the coverage of initial screening, the rate of lost follow-up, referrals for rescreening and diagnostic evaluation, and the prevalence of hearing impairment.
RESULTS: A total of 5,986 newborns were born. Of these, 96.5% were screened. The passing rate for the initial screening and rescreening was 71.8%. However, 27.5% of newborns were lost to follow-up. Only 0.7% required referral for a diagnostic evaluation. The overall prevalence of hearing impairment was 2.6 per 1,000 newborns.
CONCLUSIONS: Early identification of hearing loss through newborn screening improves the lives of affected individuals. Our program currently meets the World Health Organization\'s 1-3-6 benchmark goals. However, the underestimation of permanent hearing loss due to the 30% lost-to-follow-up rate is a limitation. Emphasizing the importance of the screening program is crucial to raising awareness and improving the accuracy of prevalence rates.

The World Health Organization considers Universal Neonatal Hearing Screening (UNHS) essential to global public health. Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram has included newborn hearing screening in India since 2013. The program faces human, infrastructure, and equipment shortages. First-line hearing screening with improved diagnostic accuracy is needed. The Portable Automated Auditory Brainstem Responses (P-AABR) can be used in remote areas for UNHS due to its low infrastructure needs and diagnostic accuracy. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of P-AABR in UNHS. We employed an analytical model based on decision trees to assess the cost-effectiveness of Otoacoustic Emission (OAE) and P-AABR. The total cost to the health system for P-AABR, regardless of true positive cases, is INR 10,535,915, while OAE costs INR 7,256,198. P-AABR detects 262 cases, whereas OAE detects 26 cases. Portable Automated ABR costs INR 97 per case detection, while OAE costs INR 67. The final ICER was 97407.69. The P-AABR device is cost-effective, safe and feasible for UNHS Rashtriya Bal Swasthya Karyakram (RBSK) programs. Beyond reducing false referrals and parent indirect costs, it detects more hearing-impaired infants. Even in shortages of skilled workers, existing staff can be trained. Thus, this study suggests integrating this device into community and primary health centers to expand UNHS coverage.

BACKGROUND: This study examined the relationship between behavioural thresholds as measured by pure tone audiometry and electrophysiological thresholds measured by the Auditory Steady-State Response (ASSR) in children with normal hearing and sensorineural hearing loss.
METHODS: After being assessed, 45 children of both sexes, ranging in age from 5 to 15, were split into four groups: 10 with moderate to moderately severe sensorineural hearing loss (G2M); 10 with steeply sloping sensorineural hearing loss (G2D); 10 with profound and severe sensorineural hearing loss (G2S); and 15 with normal hearing (G1). ASSR, tympanometry, acoustic reflex testing, pure tone audiometry, and speech audiometry (SRT and SDT) were performed.
RESULTS: The electrophysiological maximum in the group with normal hearing thresholds varied from 19 to 27 dB NA. The correlation in the group with moderate to moderately severe hearing loss was 0.42-0.74. The correlation in the steeply sloping hearing loss group was 0.68-0.94. The correlation in the group of people with profound and severe hearing loss was 0.59-0.86. The normal hearing group\'s mean differences in ASSR threshold and audiometric threshold ranged from -0.3 to 12 dB, in the moderate and moderately severe hearing loss group from -9 to 2 dB, in the steeply sloping hearing loss group from 1.4 to 7.5 dB, and in the severe and profound hearing loss group from -0.40 to 8.5 dB.
CONCLUSIONS: As expected, there was no strong relationship between behavioural and electrophysiological thresholds in the group with normal hearing. But in children with hearing loss, there was a strong correlation between electrophysiological and behavioural thresholds; this relationship was especially evident in children with severe and profound hearing loss and those with steeply sloping hearing loss.

Hearing health is a public health concern that affects the quality of life and can be disturbed by noise exposure, generating auditory and extra-auditory symptoms. Objective. To identify the hearing health status in adults living in Bogotá and its association with environmental noise exposure and individual and otological factors.
To identify the hearing health status in adults living in Bogotá and its association with environmental noise exposure and individual and otological factors.
We conducted a cross-sectional study using a database with 10,311 records from 2014 to 2018, consigned in a structured survey of noise perception and hearing screening. We performed a descriptive, bivariate, and binary logistic regression analysis.
Of the included participants, 35.4% presented hearing impairment. In the perception component, 13.0 % reported not hearing well; 28.8 % had extra-auditory symptoms, 53.3 % informed otological antecedents and 69.0 % presented discomfort due to extramural noise. In the logistic regression, the variables with the highest association for hearing impairment were living in noisy areas (OR = 1.50) (95% CI: 1.34-1.69), being male (OR = 1.85) (95% CI: 1.64-2.09), increasing age (for each year of life, the risk of hearing impairment increased 6%), and having history of extra-auditory symptoms (OR = 1.86) (95% CI: 1.66-2.08).
Hearing impairment is multi-causal in the studied population. The factors that promote its prevalence are increasing age, being male, smoking, ototoxic medications, living in areas with high noise exposure, and extra-auditory symptoms.
Introducción. La salud auditiva es un tema de interés en salud pública que afecta la calidad de vida y que puede afectarse por la exposición continua al ruido, un factor de riesgo que genera síntomas auditivos y extraauditivos. Objetivo. Identificar el estado de salud auditiva de adultos que viven en Bogotá, y su asociación con factores de exposición a ruido ambiental, individuales y otológicos. Materiales y métodos. Se realizó un estudio transversal mediante el análisis de una base de datos con 10.311 registros, obtenidos entre los años 2014 y 2018, producto de una encuesta estructurada de percepción de ruido y tamizaje auditivo. Se hizo un análisis descriptivo bivariado y una regresión logística binaria. Resultados. El 35,4 % de los participantes presentó disminución auditiva. En el componente de percepción: 13,0 % refirió no escuchar bien, 28,8 % informó síntomas extraauditivos, 53,3 % tenía antecedentes otológicos, y 69,0 % manifestó molestia por ruido extramural. En la regresión logística, las variables más asociadas con disminución auditiva fueron: de las ambientales, vivir en zonas de mayor ruido (OR = 1,50) (IC95%: 1,34-1,69); de las individuales, ser hombre (OR = 1,85) (IC95%: 1,64-2,09) y la edad (por cada año de vida, el riesgo de disminución auditiva aumentó 6 %); y de las otológicas, tener antecedente de síntomas otológicos (OR = 1,86) (IC95%: 1,66-2,08). Conclusiones. La disminución auditiva es multicausal en la población evaluada. Los factores que aumentan su prevalencia son incremento de la edad, ser hombre, tabaquismo, medicamentos ototóxicos, vivir en zonas de mayor exposición a ruido y presentar síntomas extraauditivos.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate age-related disparities in the diagnosis and treatment of borderline/mild hearing loss (HL) in the United States.
METHODS: A cross-sectional epidemiologic study.
METHODS: The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES).
METHODS: Multivariable logistic regressions controlling for hearing level were performed to investigate the association between: (1) age and recent hearing test; (2) age and hearing aid use. Age was grouped into quartiles (<25, 25-49, 50-74, ≥75 years). The first quartile of life was used as a reference group in all odds ratios, controlling for hearing level.
RESULTS: Of 2115 participants with borderline/mild HL, 3 % (n = 53) were in age quartile Q1; 7 % (n = 147) were in Q2, 56 % (n = 1190) were in Q3, and 34 % (n = 725) were in Q4. Compared to Q1, those in Q2, Q3, and Q4 had 4.06 times (95 % CI = 2.11-8.02, p < 0.001), 4.51 times (2.56-8.19, p < 0.001), and 4.56 times (2.55-8.39, p < 0.001) lower odds of a hearing test within the past 4 years. Similar, although slightly larger, odds ratios were obtained when the outcome was hearing test within 1 year. Compared to Q1, those in Q2, Q3, and Q4 respectively had 4.38 times (1.47-13.5, p < 0.05), 5.41 times (2.27-11.8, p < 0.001), and 3.95 times (1.65-8.72, p < 0.05) lower odds of using a hearing aid.
CONCLUSIONS: We have characterized a large, unaddressed, and modifiable disparity in the treatment of borderline/mild HL as individuals age out of the first quartile of life. Future studies are needed to explore factors, such as ageism, that may underlie these findings.

UNASSIGNED: To develop and validate a click-based mobile \"Audiclick\" app employing click noises for hearing assessments.
UNASSIGNED: This prospective comparative study compares the \"AudiClick\" app as a hearing screening tool to pure tone audiometry. Participants listened to sounds through wired earbud headphones that were connected to an Android or iOS device.
UNASSIGNED: The study involved 110 participants aged between 18 to 80 years old. All degrees of hearing loss severity corresponds to pure tone average (p < 0.01) results. The app was also found to be effective at identifying hearing loss (80-99% sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value, and accuracy). Test-retest reliability had also shown excellent ICC scores of 0.93.
UNASSIGNED: This study demonstrates that a mobile app using click sounds can be as efficient as pure tone audiometry for field screenings, while being more cost-effective and easier to develop.

UNASSIGNED: Early detection of hearing loss and subsequent intervention leads to better speech, language and educational outcomes giving way to improved social economic prospects in adult life. This can be achieved through establishing newborn and infant hearing screening programs.
UNASSIGNED: To determine the prevalence of hearing loss in newborns and infants in Nairobi, Kenya.
UNASSIGNED: A cross-sectional pilot study was conducted at the National hospital and at a sub county hospital immunization clinic. A total of 9,963 babies aged 0-3 years, were enrolled in the hearing screening program through convenient sampling over a period of nine months. A case history was administered followed by Distortion Product Oto-acoustic emissions (DPOAEs) and automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) hearing screening.
UNASSIGNED: The screening coverage rate was 98.6% (9963/10,104). The referral rate for the initial screen was 3.6% (356/ 9,963), the return rate for follow-up rescreening was 72% (258 babies out of 356) with a lost to follow-up rate of 28% (98/356). The referral rate of the second screen was 10% (26/258). All the 26 babies referred from the second screen returned for diagnostic hearing evaluation and were confirmed with hearing loss, yielding a prevalence of 3/1000.
UNASSIGNED: Establishing universal newborn and infant hearing screening programs is essential for early detection and intervention for hearing loss. Data management and efficient follow-up systems are an integral part of achieving diagnostic confirmation of hearing loss and early intervention.

OBJECTIVE: Hearing impairment affects a small but significant percentage of newborns (0.1-0.4%). Newborn hearing screening (NHS) is recommended for early detection and treatment. The implementation of NHS can vary among countries. In this study, we present the methodology, organization, and technical requirements of NHS. This study analyzed results from a tertiary hospital, identified issues, and proposed solutions.
METHODS: In the studied region, there are five maternity hospitals and a perinatal intensive care center and in 2020, there were 5,864 live births. Screening is performed at three levels. The first screening is conducted on the 2nd-3rd day of a newborn\'s life in a maternity hospital, the first rescreening on the 3rd-6th week at a relevant ENT department, and the second rescreening on the 3rd-6th month of life at the regional screening center where the central database is also held.
RESULTS: In the studied region, 5,793 out of 5,864 (98.79%) newborns received NHS in 2020. Of these, 120 (2.07%) were tested positive on their first screening. Ninety-four patients (78.3%) of those attended the ENT department for a first rescreening. Thirty-four patients (0.59% of total) were tested positive again and referred to the regional screening center. Out of the 27 patients who attended the second rescreening, four (0.07% of the total) were ultimately diagnosed with hearing impairment.
CONCLUSIONS: Our study found that newborn hearing screening (NHS) in our region achieved a high compliance rate of 98.8% for initial screenings in 2020. However, challenges remain in the rescreening process due to data management issues, inter-regional cooperation, and public awareness. The recent implementation of mandatory screenings, updated guidelines, and a centralized database is expected to enhance the effectiveness of NHS. Further research is needed to evaluate these improvements.