喀麦隆,新生儿听力和视力筛查。

IF 8.4 2区 医学 Q1 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Bulletin of the World Health Organization Pub Date : 2025-06-01 Epub Date: 2025-05-03 DOI:10.2471/BLT.24.292431
Gaelle Vofo, Brice Vofo, Winnie Anoumedem, Holgar Fung, Demosthene Afofou, Christabel Abanda, Serge Fankeng, Winnie Mbwentchou, Eugenie Mempouo, Sara Kingue, Yanelle Wandji, Pamela Ngounou, Maurice Mpessa, Wilfried Ganni, Francine Mveng, Evelyne Nguedia, Caren Mason, Evariste Nguimkeu, Frenkel Shahar, Sagit Stern, Michal Kaufmann, Clement Assob, Christian Andjock, Menachem Gross, Richard Njock
{"title":"喀麦隆,新生儿听力和视力筛查。","authors":"Gaelle Vofo, Brice Vofo, Winnie Anoumedem, Holgar Fung, Demosthene Afofou, Christabel Abanda, Serge Fankeng, Winnie Mbwentchou, Eugenie Mempouo, Sara Kingue, Yanelle Wandji, Pamela Ngounou, Maurice Mpessa, Wilfried Ganni, Francine Mveng, Evelyne Nguedia, Caren Mason, Evariste Nguimkeu, Frenkel Shahar, Sagit Stern, Michal Kaufmann, Clement Assob, Christian Andjock, Menachem Gross, Richard Njock","doi":"10.2471/BLT.24.292431","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate a combined hearing and eye screening model for newborns attending immunization clinics in Cameroon.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analysed data from a screening project that took place between November 2021 and February 2024, which assessed both the hearing and eyes of newborns using otoacoustic emission and fundal reflex tests, respectively. We then evaluated sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of screening conducted by trained auxiliary staff versus specialists.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We screened 1807 newborns, of which 54% (976) were female. The median age at screening was 13 days. Eight percent of newborns (141/1807) did not pass the otoacoustic emission test; screeners scheduled these newborns for a second-line otoacoustic emission test within three months. Only 28% (39/141) returned for the repeat otoacoustic emission test. Of the returning babies, 33% (13/39) still did not pass, and screeners referred them for an auditory brainstem response threshold test. Screeners detected an absent fundal reflex in 2% (27) of babies. Compared to specialists, trained auxiliary staff showed 82% sensitivity and 99% specificity in hearing screening; predictive values were 90% (positive) and 99% (negative). For eye screening, sensitivity was 67% and specificity 99%, with predictive values of 86% (positive) and 98% (negative).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combined screening performed by trained auxiliary staff in immunization clinics offers a promising approach to screening newborns' hearing and eyes, enabling broader population coverage with fewer resources. Combined screening conducted at immunization clinics includes both hospital- and community-born babies and is therefore suitable for countries with a high number of out-of-hospital births.</p>","PeriodicalId":9465,"journal":{"name":"Bulletin of the World Health Organization","volume":"103 6","pages":"375-382"},"PeriodicalIF":8.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12152715/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Newborn screening for hearing and sight, Cameroon.\",\"authors\":\"Gaelle Vofo, Brice Vofo, Winnie Anoumedem, Holgar Fung, Demosthene Afofou, Christabel Abanda, Serge Fankeng, Winnie Mbwentchou, Eugenie Mempouo, Sara Kingue, Yanelle Wandji, Pamela Ngounou, Maurice Mpessa, Wilfried Ganni, Francine Mveng, Evelyne Nguedia, Caren Mason, Evariste Nguimkeu, Frenkel Shahar, Sagit Stern, Michal Kaufmann, Clement Assob, Christian Andjock, Menachem Gross, Richard Njock\",\"doi\":\"10.2471/BLT.24.292431\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate a combined hearing and eye screening model for newborns attending immunization clinics in Cameroon.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We analysed data from a screening project that took place between November 2021 and February 2024, which assessed both the hearing and eyes of newborns using otoacoustic emission and fundal reflex tests, respectively. We then evaluated sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of screening conducted by trained auxiliary staff versus specialists.</p><p><strong>Findings: </strong>We screened 1807 newborns, of which 54% (976) were female. The median age at screening was 13 days. Eight percent of newborns (141/1807) did not pass the otoacoustic emission test; screeners scheduled these newborns for a second-line otoacoustic emission test within three months. Only 28% (39/141) returned for the repeat otoacoustic emission test. Of the returning babies, 33% (13/39) still did not pass, and screeners referred them for an auditory brainstem response threshold test. Screeners detected an absent fundal reflex in 2% (27) of babies. Compared to specialists, trained auxiliary staff showed 82% sensitivity and 99% specificity in hearing screening; predictive values were 90% (positive) and 99% (negative). For eye screening, sensitivity was 67% and specificity 99%, with predictive values of 86% (positive) and 98% (negative).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Combined screening performed by trained auxiliary staff in immunization clinics offers a promising approach to screening newborns' hearing and eyes, enabling broader population coverage with fewer resources. Combined screening conducted at immunization clinics includes both hospital- and community-born babies and is therefore suitable for countries with a high number of out-of-hospital births.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":9465,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Bulletin of the World Health Organization\",\"volume\":\"103 6\",\"pages\":\"375-382\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":8.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12152715/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Bulletin of the World Health Organization\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.24.292431\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/5/3 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Bulletin of the World Health Organization","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2471/BLT.24.292431","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/5/3 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:评价喀麦隆免疫门诊新生儿听力和视力联合筛查模式。方法:我们分析了2021年11月至2024年2月期间进行的筛查项目的数据,该项目分别使用耳声发射和眼底反射测试评估新生儿的听力和眼睛。然后,我们评估了由训练有素的辅助人员与专家进行筛查的敏感性、特异性和预测值。结果:我们筛查了1807例新生儿,其中54%(976例)为女性。筛查时的中位年龄为13天。8%的新生儿(141/1807)没有通过耳声发射测试;筛查人员安排这些新生儿在三个月内进行二线耳声发射测试。只有28%(39/141)返回进行重复耳声发射测试。在返回的婴儿中,33%(13/39)仍然没有通过,筛选者建议他们进行听觉脑干反应阈值测试。筛查者在2%(27)的婴儿中检测到没有眼底反射。与专家相比,训练有素的辅助人员在听力筛查中的敏感性为82%,特异性为99%;预测值分别为90%(阳性)和99%(阴性)。对于眼部筛查,敏感性为67%,特异性为99%,预测值分别为86%(阳性)和98%(阴性)。结论:由免疫诊所训练有素的辅助人员进行联合筛查是一种很有前途的新生儿听力和眼睛筛查方法,可以用更少的资源实现更广泛的人群覆盖。在免疫诊所进行的联合筛查包括医院和社区出生的婴儿,因此适用于院外出生人数较多的国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Newborn screening for hearing and sight, Cameroon.

Objective: To evaluate a combined hearing and eye screening model for newborns attending immunization clinics in Cameroon.

Methods: We analysed data from a screening project that took place between November 2021 and February 2024, which assessed both the hearing and eyes of newborns using otoacoustic emission and fundal reflex tests, respectively. We then evaluated sensitivity, specificity and predictive values of screening conducted by trained auxiliary staff versus specialists.

Findings: We screened 1807 newborns, of which 54% (976) were female. The median age at screening was 13 days. Eight percent of newborns (141/1807) did not pass the otoacoustic emission test; screeners scheduled these newborns for a second-line otoacoustic emission test within three months. Only 28% (39/141) returned for the repeat otoacoustic emission test. Of the returning babies, 33% (13/39) still did not pass, and screeners referred them for an auditory brainstem response threshold test. Screeners detected an absent fundal reflex in 2% (27) of babies. Compared to specialists, trained auxiliary staff showed 82% sensitivity and 99% specificity in hearing screening; predictive values were 90% (positive) and 99% (negative). For eye screening, sensitivity was 67% and specificity 99%, with predictive values of 86% (positive) and 98% (negative).

Conclusion: Combined screening performed by trained auxiliary staff in immunization clinics offers a promising approach to screening newborns' hearing and eyes, enabling broader population coverage with fewer resources. Combined screening conducted at immunization clinics includes both hospital- and community-born babies and is therefore suitable for countries with a high number of out-of-hospital births.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Bulletin of the World Health Organization
Bulletin of the World Health Organization 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
11.50
自引率
0.90%
发文量
317
审稿时长
3 months
期刊介绍: The Bulletin of the World Health Organization Journal Overview: Leading public health journal Peer-reviewed monthly journal Special focus on developing countries Global scope and authority Top public and environmental health journal Impact factor of 6.818 (2018), according to Web of Science ranking Audience: Essential reading for public health decision-makers and researchers Provides blend of research, well-informed opinion, and news
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信