Basit öğe kaydını göster

dc.contributor.authorKonukseven, Ozlem
dc.contributor.authorGenc, Aydan
dc.contributor.authorMuderris, Togay
dc.contributor.authorKayıkcı, Mavis Kulak
dc.contributor.authorTurkyılmaz, Didem
dc.contributor.authorOztürk, Burak
dc.contributor.authorGündüz, Bülent
dc.date.accessioned2019-12-19T07:13:28Z
dc.date.available2019-12-19T07:13:28Z
dc.date.issued2010
dc.identifier.issn1308-7649
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/11655/20997
dc.identifier.urihttps://advancedotology.org/en/can-automated-auditory-brainstem-response-be-used-as-an-initial-stage-screening-test-in-newborn-hearing-screening-programs-13562
dc.description.abstractObjectives: Generally, newborns have been tested according to the method recommended by the Joint Committee on Infant Hearing all around the world: a two-stage automated transient evoked oto-acoustic emissions (ATEOAE) program, completed by an automated auditory brainstem response (AABR) for the positive diagnosis of hearing impairment. However, there are still some controversies on this two-stage method. In this study, we used ATEOAE and AABR in combination as an initial stage screening protocol to investigate if we could reduce the disadvantages of routinely performed screening procedure. Materials and Methods: A total of 1,978 neonates were screened for hearing impairment during the study period prospectively. 1,917 of them were tested with both ATEOAE and AABR in the first day of their life. If newborns did not meet pass criteria for any of the tests, both tests were repeated in 10-day period. Results: Out of 1,917 neonates, 202 (10.53%) were failed the initial ATEOAE, and 37 (1.97%) failed the initial AABR. 158 of the 202 neonates that failed the ATEOAE and all neonates that failed AABR was subjected to the second test. Four (2.5%) neonates failed second ATEOAE, and three (1,89%) failed second AABR. All four neonates were referred for further audiologic evaluation, and three of them, whose AABR were negative, were diagnosed as having congenital hearing loss. Conclusion: As a first stage screening method AABR has the lowest false positive rate, referral rate and high specificity. Therefore, we recommend that all universal newborn hearing screening programs should consider revising their protocols to decrease expenses in terms of time and money.
dc.language.isoen
dc.publisherAves
dc.rightsinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
dc.subjectOtorhinolaryngology
dc.titleCan Automated Auditory Brainstem Response Be Used As An Initial Stage Screening Test in Newborn Hearing Screening Programs?
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/article
dc.typeinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion
dc.relation.journalJournal Of International Advanced Otology
dc.contributor.departmentOdyoloji
dc.identifier.volume6
dc.identifier.issue2
dc.identifier.startpage231
dc.identifier.endpage238
dc.description.indexWoS


Bu öğenin dosyaları:

Bu öğe aşağıdaki koleksiyon(lar)da görünmektedir.

Basit öğe kaydını göster