Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Main outcomes from the first 2 years of France's screening programme for neonatal permanent hearing loss through a descriptive study.
Doncarli, Alexandra; Tillaut, Hélène; Akkari, Mohamed; Baladi, Blandine; Creutz-Leroy, Margaux; Parodi, Marine; Beltzer, Nathalie; Goulet, Véronique; Regnault, Nolwenn.
Afiliación
  • Doncarli A; Santé publique France, French national public health agency, Non-Communicable Diseases and Trauma Division, Saint-Maurice, France.
  • Tillaut H; Santé publique France, French national public health agency, Regional office of Brittany, Saint-Maurice, France.
  • Akkari M; Ear, Nose and Throat &Head and Neck Surgery, University Hospital Gui de Chauliac, University of Montpellier, Montpellier, France.
  • Baladi B; Perinatal Network of Occitanie, Nancy, France.
  • Creutz-Leroy M; Perinatal Network of Occitanie, Nancy, France.
  • Parodi M; Department of Otorhinolaryngology and Head and Neck Surgery, Purpan University Hospital, Toulouse, France.
  • Beltzer N; Perinatal Network of Lorraine, Nancy, France.
  • Goulet V; Pediatric Ear, Nose and Throat & Head and Neck Surgery department, CRMR MALO, University Hospital Necker-Enfants malades, AP-HP, Paris, France.
  • Regnault N; Santé publique France, French national public health agency, Non-Communicable Diseases and Trauma Division, Saint-Maurice, France.
Acta Paediatr ; 111(10): 1907-1913, 2022 10.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35642710
AIM: This study aimed to evaluate the implementation of France's neonatal hearing loss screening programme years after its launch, and to estimate permanent bilateral neonatal hearing loss (PBNHL) prevalence and distribution by severity. METHODS: This descriptive study used aggregated regional data on all births in France in 2015-2016. Screening coverage, refusal rate, positive predictive value (PPV), proportion of children with suspected PBNHL, PBNHL prevalence and distribution by severity were calculated. RESULTS: Eight hundred thousand neonates were eligible for the screening programme per year. Between 2015 and 2016, screening coverage increased (83.3% vs. 93.8%; p < 0.001), and the refusal rate remained stable (0.1%). In 2016, when considering the additional tests performed several weeks after birth, the proportion of suspected PBNHL neonates decreased (1.4% vs. 0.9%) while the PPV increased (4.7% vs. 7.6%). In 2015, the estimated prevalence of PBNHL (moderate to profound) was 0.09% (95% CI 0.08-0.10). Among neonates with >= 41 decibels deficit, 56.8%, 16.6%, and 26.6% had moderate, severe and profound hearing loss, respectively. CONCLUSION: The national target of 90% screening coverage was exceeded. The additional test could be useful to avoid overcrowding in diagnostic structures. Diagnostic data quality must be improved to confirm PBNHL prevalence and distribution by severity.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Pérdida Auditiva / Enfermedades del Recién Nacido Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Child / Humans / Newborn Idioma: En Revista: Acta Paediatr Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Francia Pais de publicación: Noruega
Texto completo
Añadir a Mi BVS
Imprimir
XML
PubMed Links
Buscar en Google

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Pérdida Auditiva / Enfermedades del Recién Nacido Tipo de estudio: Diagnostic_studies / Prevalence_studies / Prognostic_studies / Screening_studies Límite: Child / Humans / Newborn Idioma: En Revista: Acta Paediatr Año: 2022 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Francia Pais de publicación: Noruega