Duration of automated auditory brainstem response test for the initial hearing screening and influencing factors for the duration in neonates

TIAN Na, JU Xiu-Li, XU Bo, ZHENG Nan, ZHAO Min

Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics ›› 2020, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (10) : 1085-1091.

PDF(1468 KB)
PDF(1468 KB)
Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics ›› 2020, Vol. 22 ›› Issue (10) : 1085-1091. DOI: 10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2004194
CLINICAL RESEARCH

Duration of automated auditory brainstem response test for the initial hearing screening and influencing factors for the duration in neonates

  • TIAN Na1,2, JU Xiu-Li1, XU Bo2, ZHENG Nan2, ZHAO Min2
Author information +
History +

Abstract

Objective To study the duration of automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) test for initial hearing screening and the factors influencing the duration in neonates. Methods A total of 472 neonates who were admitted to the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) were enrolled as the study group and 182 healthy neonates were enrolled as the healthy control group. The influence of the duration of AABR test on the initial screening results was observed in the two groups. The influencing factors for the AABR test duration were analyzed. Results In the AABR screening of 180, 360, and 540 seconds, the study group had a failure rate of 41.5%, 28.4%, and 24.4% respectively, while the healthy control group had a failure rate of 31.3%, 19.8%, and 15.4% respectively, showing a decreasing trend with the extension of test time in both groups (P < 0.05). In the two groups, the screening results of 180-second testing were moderately consistent with those of 360- or 540-second testing (Kappa<0.75, P < 0.05), and the screening results of 360-second testing were highly consistent with those of 540-second testing (Kappa>0.75, P < 0.05). In the study group, the median duration of AABR test was 108 seconds (95%CI:97-120 seconds), which was significantly longer than the duration of 75 seconds (95%CI:65-85 seconds) in the healthy control group (P < 0.05). The Cox regression analysis showed that maternal age ≥ 35 years, anemia, and electrolyte disturbance (RR < 1, P < 0.05) were independent risk factors for prolonged AABR test duration, while the prolonged continuous positive airway pressure-assisted ventilation was a protective factor (RR > 1, P < 0.05). Conclusions The AABR test time of 360-540 seconds for initial hearing screening helps to reduce false positive results due to environmental and risk factors in neonates. It may be useful to reduce the false positive results of AABR screening before discharge by taking corresponding intervention measures for NICU neonates with high risk factors.

Key words

Automated auditory brainstem response / Hearing screening / Test duration / Risk factor / Neonate

Cite this article

Download Citations
TIAN Na, JU Xiu-Li, XU Bo, ZHENG Nan, ZHAO Min. Duration of automated auditory brainstem response test for the initial hearing screening and influencing factors for the duration in neonates[J]. Chinese Journal of Contemporary Pediatrics. 2020, 22(10): 1085-1091 https://doi.org/10.7499/j.issn.1008-8830.2004194

References

[1] 中华人民共和国卫生部. 新生儿听力筛查技术规范[卫妇社发[2010]96号] [J]. 中国儿童保健杂志, 2011, 19(6):574-575.
[2] 陈惠兰, 赵娜, 吴菲, 等. 不同胎龄早产儿听力筛查结果及高危因素分析[J]. 中国妇幼保健, 2019, 34(5):1076-1078.
[3] 汤超, 冯益进. 某医院2016~2017年二胎高龄产妇新生儿听力筛查结果分析[J]. 安徽医学, 2018, 39(7):835-838.
[4] 尹细凝. 住院早产儿危险因素及并发症的分析[D]. 南昌:南昌大学, 2019.
[5] 占诗贵. 重症监护室新生儿听力筛查结果分析[D]. 南昌:南昌大学, 2009.
[6] 付惠玲, 宋舜意, 赵卫东, 等. 新生儿自动脑干听性诱发电位的影响因素[J]. 中华实用儿科临床杂志, 2016, 31(2):150-152.
[7] 高湘杰, 彭晓娟, 邓忠, 等. 新生儿听力损失高危因素与听力筛查研究进展[J]. 中国耳鼻咽喉颅底外科杂志, 2019, 25(6):692-698.
[8] 邵肖梅, 叶鸿瑁, 丘小汕. 实用新生儿学[M]. 第4版. 北京:人民卫生出版社, 2011.
[9] Johnson LC, Toro M, Vishnja E, et al. Age and other factors affecting the outcome of AABR screening in neonates[J]. Hosp Pediatr, 2018, 8(3):141-147.
[10] Davis A, Bamford J, Stevens J. Performance of neonatal and infant hearing screens:sensitivity and specificity[J]. Br J Audiol, 2001, 35(1):3-15.
[11] Cebulla M, Shehata-Dieler W. ABR-based newborn hearing screening with MB11 BERAphone® using an optimized chirp for acoustical stimulation[J]. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2012, 76(4):536-543.
[12] de Kock T, Swanepoel D, Hall JW 3rd. Newborn hearing screening at a community-based obstetric unit:screening and diagnostic outcomes[J]. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2016, 84:124-131.
[13] 费沛沛, 周蕊, 杨蕊, 等. 不同分娩方式新生儿自动听性脑干反应听力初筛的最佳时间探讨[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2017, 25(5):468-471.
[14] 马丹, 应民政. 新生儿听力筛查结果假阳性的影响因素研究进展[J]. 医学综述, 2017, 23(21):4293-4297.
[15] Schieffer KM, Chuang CH, Connor J, et al. Association of iron deficiency anemia with hearing loss in US adults[J]. JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg, 2017, 143(4):350-354.
[16] 赵纪余, 丁大连, 罗德峰, 等. 缺氧致内耳超微结构改变的实验研究[J]. 中华耳鼻咽喉科杂志, 1991, 26(2):83-84.
[17] Bergstrom L, Thompson P, Sando I, et al. Renal disease. Its pathology, treatment, and effects on the ear[J]. Arch Otolaryngol, 1980, 106(9):567-572.
[18] Liang C, Hong Q, Jiang TT, et al. The effects and outcomes of electrolyte disturbances and asphyxia on newborns hearing[J]. Int J Pediatr Otorhinolaryngol, 2013, 77(7):1072-1076.
[19] 凌琴音, 李茂清, 徐碧红, 等. 7840例新生儿听力筛查和听力损失高危因素分析[J]. 听力学及言语疾病杂志, 2016, 24(3):280-282.

PDF(1468 KB)

Accesses

Citation

Detail

Sections
Recommended

/