Eiserman et al. (2007) Screening for heairng loss in early childhood programs

Abstract

This study assessed the feasibility of doing hearing screening in Migrant, American Indian and Early Head Start programs using otoacoustic emissions (OAE) technology. Staff members were trained to screen 0–3-year-old children for hearing loss using handheld OAE equipment and a multi-step screening and referral protocol. Of the 3486 children screened as a part of the study, 77% passed an OAE screening at the first step, 18% more passed an OAE screening at the second step, and 5% were ultimately referred for medical or audiological follow-up. Eighty children were identified as having a hearing loss or disorder of the outer, middle or inner ear requiring treatment. Of these 80, six had permanent bilateral or unilateral hearing loss. The median time required to complete a single OAE screening session was 4 minutes per child. The results demonstrate that OAE screening of young children using this protocol is practical and effective. The implications for conducting periodic hearing screening throughout early childhood are discussed.

Nicholas and Geers (2007) Will they catch up?

ABSTRACT

Purpose: This study evaluated whether younger cochlear implantation, longer cochlear implant use, and greater pre-implant aided hearing was associated with better language outcomesat 3.5 and 4.5 years of age.

Method: Language samples were obtained at ages 3.5 and 4.5 years from 76 children who received an implant by their 3rd birthday. Hierarchical linear modeling was used to identify characteristics associated with spoken language outcomes at the 2 test ages. The Preschool Language Scale was used to compare the participants’ skills with those of hearing age-mates at age 4.5 years.

Results: Expected language scores increased with younger age at implant and lower pre-implant thresholds, even when compared at the same duration of implant use. Expected Preschool Language Scale scores of the children who received the implant at the youngest ages reached those of hearing age-mates by 4.5 years, but those children implanted after 24 months of age did not catch up with hearing peers.

Conclusion: Children who received a cochlear implant before a substantial delay in spoken language developed (i.e., between 12 and 16 months) were more likely to achieve age-appropriate spoken language. These results favor cochlear implantation before 24 months of age, especially for children with aided pure-tone average thresholds greater than 65 dB prior to surgery.

Rubens et al. (2007) Do otoacoustic emissions predict SIDS?

Abstract

Rubens DD, et al (2007) Newborn oto-acoustic emission hearing screening tests.Early Hum Dev. doi:10.1016/j.earlhumdev.2007.06.001

Objective: To evaluate the newborn transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) hearing screening tests of infants later diagnosed with the sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS).

Study design: In a case-controlled study, the newborn TEOAE hearing screens of 31 infants who subsequently died of SIDS were retrospectively compared to those of 31 newborn infants that survived the first year of life. SIDS cases were individually matched to surviving controls based on gender, term versus preterm age and NICU versus well baby nursery.

Results: The TEOAE screens of SIDS infants demonstrated significantly decreased signal to noise ratios at 2000, 3000, and 4000 Hz (p <>

Conclusion: Newborns at risk for SIDS are currently indistinguishable from other newborns and are only identified following a later fatal event. A unilateral difference in cochlear function is a unique finding that may offer the opportunity to identify infants at risk of SIDS during the early postnatal period with a simple non invasive hearing screen test. The ability to implement preventative measures well in advance of a potential critical incident would be an important breakthrough.