Page 3493 - Week 11 - Wednesday, 15 November 2006
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .
parents. That equates to an ACT compliance rate of about 98.6 per cent of eligible infants. I am not sure that, with those figures, you will get much better than that.
ACT newborn hearing screening program records show that, of those babies screened in 2005-06, 31 babies were referred for diagnostic hearing evaluation and that, of those 31, 18 referrals for diagnostic evaluation came from within the ACT, comprising 58 per cent of all babies. That is presumably because we have a lot of babies from outside the ACT.
Thirteen were identified at TCH out of 2,071 infants; four were identified from the 2,009 infants tested at Calvary; and one infant was identified at John James Memorial Hospital from 1,154 infants tested at that site. A further 13 newborn referrals for diagnostic hearing evaluation came through the New South Wales state-wide infant hearing screening program.
The numbers we saw at TCH are in the expected range from a major tertiary hospital. However, the numbers referred for diagnostic testing from the other sites, particularly Calvary Private and Calvary John James Hospitals, were perhaps underrepresented. We will be monitoring those results to see if referral patterns change over time.
The screening program is operational seven days per week across all ACT maternity hospital sites. This level of coverage is essential, given that many mums and babies do not stay in hospital for extended periods, and also that many babies decide to arrive when they like, such as on weekends, and could miss out on the Monday to Friday service.
The seven day a week service is preferable to a recall service for missed screening, as such programs have proven to be more time consuming and less effective in universal coverage. The specific needs of high-risk infants have also been looked at as part of this program. Particular care is taken to ensure that babies who require admission to the centre for newborn care are followed up comprehensively.
I think more work needs to be done to evaluate the effectiveness of screening in this high-risk population. At this time we cannot say for certain whether there are a higher number of babies with hearing impairment after intensive care; however, as the relationship between intensive care and hearing impairment has been suggested by some, it would be unwise to ignore the possible linkage.
Of the 31 newborns identified through the screening program in the last financial year, 15 different categories of hearing loss have been identified. Some of the outcomes of the screening and diagnostic testing include one infant with profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss who is under consideration for a cochlear implant.
Another infant diagnosed with moderate to severe hearing loss is being considered for hearing aids. Eleven infants were referred for medical examination to a general practitioner and/or paediatrician. Of these infants, seven were referred or advised to seek ear, nose and throat specialist follow-up.
All babies were referred for follow-up at eight to 10 months of age with Australian Hearing. Australian Hearing is an Australian government agency dedicated to help
Next page . . . . Previous page . . . . Speeches . . . . Contents . . . . Debates(HTML) . . . . PDF . . . .