Hearing loss screening tool (COBRA score) for newborns in primary care setting.
10.3345/kjp.2017.60.11.353
- Author:
Watcharapol POONUAL
1
;
Niramon NAVACHAROEN
;
Jaran KANGSANARAK
;
Sirianong NAMWONGPROM
;
Surasak SAOKAEW
Author Information
1. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Faculty of Medicine, Chiang Mai University, Thailand.
- Publication Type:Original Article
- Keywords:
Hearing loss;
Screening tool;
Newborns;
Primary care
- MeSH:
Birth Weight;
Child;
Cohort Studies;
Elapidae;
Evoked Potentials, Auditory, Brain Stem;
Hearing Loss*;
Hearing Loss, Sensorineural;
Hearing*;
Humans;
Infant;
Infant, Newborn*;
Joints;
Mass Screening*;
Parents;
Primary Health Care*;
Prospective Studies;
Risk Factors;
ROC Curve;
Tertiary Care Centers;
Thailand
- From:Korean Journal of Pediatrics
2017;60(11):353-358
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:English
-
Abstract:
PURPOSE: To develop and evaluate a simple screening tool to assess hearing loss in newborns. A derived score was compared with the standard clinical practice tool. METHODS: This cohort study was designed to screen the hearing of newborns using transiently evoked otoacoustic emission and auditory brain stem response, and to determine the risk factors associated with hearing loss of newborns in 3 tertiary hospitals in Northern Thailand. Data were prospectively collected from November 1, 2010 to May 31, 2012. To develop the risk score, clinical-risk indicators were measured by Poisson risk regression. The regression coefficients were transformed into item scores dividing each regression-coefficient with the smallest coefficient in the model, rounding the number to its nearest integer, and adding up to a total score. RESULTS: Five clinical risk factors (Craniofacial anomaly, Ototoxicity, Birth weight, family history [Relative] of congenital sensorineural hearing loss, and Apgar score) were included in our COBRA score. The screening tool detected, by area under the receiver operating characteristic curve, more than 80% of existing hearing loss. The positive-likelihood ratio of hearing loss in patients with scores of 4, 6, and 8 were 25.21 (95% confidence interval [CI], 14.69–43.26), 58.52 (95% CI, 36.26–94.44), and 51.56 (95% CI, 33.74–78.82), respectively. This result was similar to the standard tool (The Joint Committee on Infant Hearing) of 26.72 (95% CI, 20.59–34.66). CONCLUSION: A simple screening tool of five predictors provides good prediction indices for newborn hearing loss, which may motivate parents to bring children for further appropriate testing and investigations.
