Search

Objective: To inventory provision and features of childhood hearing screening after the newborn period (CHS), primarily in Europe. Design: From each participating country or region, experts provided information through an extensive questionnaire: implementation year, age at screening, test method, pass criteria, screening location, screener profession, and quality indicators: coverage, referral, follow-up and detection rates, supplemented by literature sources. Study sample: Forty-two European countries or regions, plus Russia, Malawi, Rwanda, India, and China. Results: CHS was performed universally with pure-tone audiometry screening (PTS) in 17 countries or regions, whereas non-universal CHS was performed in eight with PTS or whisper tests. All participating countries with universal PTS had newborn hearing screening. Coverage rate was provided from three countries, detection rate from one, and referral and follow-up rate from two. In four countries, universal PTS was performed at two ages. Earliest universal PTS was performed in a (pre)school setting by nurses (n = 9, median age: 5 years, range: 3–7), in a healthcare setting by doctors and nurses (n = 7, median age: 4.5 years, range: 4–7), or in both (n = 1). Conclusions: Within universal CHS, PTS was mostly performed at 4–6 years by nurses. Insufficient collection of data and monitoring with quality indicators impedes evaluation of screening.

Occlusion therapy for amblyopia has been the mainstay of treatment for centuries, however, acceptance of the patch is often lacking. This study evaluated comfort of wear of the eye patch and assessed the mechanical properties in order to achieve a more individualized prescription.For 8 consecutive days, parents used each of the four main brands of patches for 2 consecutive days in a randomized fashion. After 2 days a 21-item questionnaire was completed to evaluate comfort of wear for each patch. Compliance was measured electronically using the Occlusion Dose Monitor (ODM). In addition, breathing capacity at 23°C and 33°C, resistance to water penetration, opacity, and strength of adhesion to the skin were measured.Twenty-four children participated. Overall, satisfaction was moderate: large differences in discomfort when removing the patch, skin reaction, and cosmetic appearance were found. In the material measurements large differences were found in opacity and strength of adhesion to the skin. In all brands breathing capability was minimal. Answers given by the parents matched the physical properties of the eye patch. There was no difference in electronically measured compliance between patches.We found large differences in comfort of wear and mechanical properties. Therefore, when prescribing a certain brand of patch, the wide variety needs to be taken into account. Further study into these properties seems warranted; especially breathing capability requires improvement since children often wear the patch for a longer period of time. This could contribute to increasing satisfaction and consequently may improve compliance.