Population Outcomes of Three Approaches to Detection of Congenital Hearing Loss

• Published in: Pediatrics (Evanston) 2016-01, Vol.137 (1), p.1
• Main Authors: Wake, Melissa, Ching, Teresa Y C, Wirth, Karen, Poulakis, Zeffie, Mensah, Fiona K, Gold, Lisa, King, Alison, Bryson, Hannah E, Reilly, Sheena, Rickards, Field
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Analysis; Audiometry; Australia; Care and treatment; Child; Child, Preschool; Children; Comparative analysis; Cost-Benefit Analysis; Female; Health aspects; Hearing Disorders - diagnosis; Hearing loss; Hearing tests; Humans; Infant; Infant, Newborn; Intervention; Male; Medical screening; Neonatal Screening - economics; Neonatal Screening - methods; Pediatrics; Quality of life; Risk Assessment; Risk Factors
• ISSN: 0031-4005; 1098-4275; 1098-4275
• DOI: 10.1542/peds.2015-1722

Universal newborn hearing screening was implemented worldwide largely on modeled, not measured, long-term benefits. Comparative quantification of population benefits would justify its high cost. Natural experiment comparing 3 population approaches to detecting bilateral congenital hearing loss (>25 dB, better ear) in Australian states with similar demographics and services: (1) universal newborn hearing screening, New South Wales 2003-2005, n = 69; (2) Risk factor screening (neonatal intensive care screening + universal risk factor referral), Victoria 2003-2005, n = 65; and (3) largely opportunistic detection, Victoria 1991-1993, n = 86. Children in (1) and (2) were followed at age 5 to 6 years and in (3) at 7 to 8 years. Outcomes were compared between states using adjusted linear regression. Children were diagnosed younger with universal than risk factor screening (adjusted mean difference -8.0 months, 95% confidence interval -12.3 to -3.7). For children without intellectual disability, moving from opportunistic to risk factor to universal screening incrementally improved age of diagnosis (22.5 vs 16.2 vs 8.1 months, P < .001), receptive (81.8 vs 83.0 vs 88.9, P = .05) and expressive (74.9 vs 80.7 vs 89.3, P < .001) language and receptive vocabulary (79.4 vs 83.8 vs 91.5, P < .001); these nonetheless remained well short of cognition (mean 103.4, SD 15.2). Behavior and health-related quality of life were unaffected. With new randomized trials unlikely, this may represent the most definitive population-based evidence supporting universal newborn hearing screening. Although outperforming risk factor screening, school entry language still lagged cognitive abilities by nearly a SD. Prompt intervention and efficacy research are needed for children to reach their potential.