Comprehensive Community Screening of Otological Patients by Trained Technicians Using a Telemedicine Device: An Efficient and Cost-Effective Way to Triage Patients With Ear Diseases.

OBJECTIVE: To emphasize the benefits of tele-otology in community screening of patients with ear diseases. METHODS: A retrospective study of all patients screened and treated under the Shruti tele-otology program between 2013 and 2019 was conducted. It involved screening, diagnosis, medical management, surgical intervention, and rehabilitation using hearing aid. The study focused on underprivileged and underserved community of rural and urban slums across 12 states of India. The study was conducted using a telemedicine device called ENTraview, that is, a camera-enabled android phone integrated with an otoscope and audiometry screening. RESULT: A total of 810 746 people were screened, and incidence of various ear diseases was recorded. Ear problems were found in 265 615 (33%) patients, of which 151 067 (57%) had impacted wax, 46 792(18%) had chronic suppurative otitis media, 27 875 (10%) had diminished hearing, 12 729 (5%) had acute otitis media and acute suppurative otitis media (ASOM), and 27 152 (10%) had problems of foreign body, otomycosis, and so on. Of the total 265 615 referred patients, 20 986 (8%) reported for treatment and received treatment at a significantly reduced cost through Shruti program partners. The conversion rate of nonsurgical and surgical procedure was also compared, and it was found that, while 9% of the patients opted for nonsurgical treatment, only 3% opted for surgery in the intervention group giving a significant P value of .00001. CONCLUSION: The potential for telemedicine to reduce inequalities in health care is immense but remains underutilized. Shruti has largely been able to bridge this gap as it is an innovative, fast, and effective programs that address the ear ailment in the community.

Cost-effectiveness of School Hearing Screening Programs: A Scoping Review.

OBJECTIVE: School hearing screening is a public health intervention that can improve care for children who experience hearing loss that is not detected on or develops after newborn screening. However, implementation of school hearing screening is sporadic and supported by mixed evidence to its economic benefit. This scoping review provides a summary of all published cost-effectiveness studies regarding school hearing screening programs globally. At the time of this review, there were no previously published reviews of a similar nature. DATA SOURCES: A structured search was applied to 4 databases: PubMed (Medline), Embase, CINAHL, and Cochrane Library. REVIEW METHODS: The database search was carried out by 2 independent researchers, and results were reported in accordance with the PRISMA-ScR checklist and the JBI methodology for scoping reviews. Studies that included a cost analysis of screening programs for school-aged children in the school environment were eligible for inclusion. Studies that involved evaluations of only neonatal or preschool programs were excluded. RESULTS: Four of the 5 studies that conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis reported that school hearing screening was cost-effective through the calculation of incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) via either quality- or disability-adjusted life years. One study reported that a new school hearing screening program dominated the existing program; 2 studies reported ICERs ranging from 1079 to 4304 international dollars; and 1 study reported an ICER of £2445. One study reported that school-entry hearing screening was not cost-effective versus no screening. CONCLUSION: The majority of studies concluded that school hearing screening was cost-effective. However, significant differences in methodology and region-specific estimates of model inputs limit the generalizability of these findings.

Implementation of a neonatal hearing screening programme in three provinces in Albania.

OBJECTIVES: The EUSCREEN study compares the cost-effectiveness of paediatric hearing screening programmes and aims to develop a cost-effectiveness model for this purpose. Alongside and informed by the development of the model, neonatal hearing screening (NHS) is implemented in Albania. We report on the first year. METHODS: An implementation plan was made addressing objectives, target population, screening protocol, screener training, screening devices, care pathways and follow up. NHS started January 1st, 2018 in four maternity hospitals: two in Tirana, one in Pogradec and one in Kukës, representing both urban and rural areas. OAE-OAE-aABR was used to screen well infants in maternity hospitals, whereas aABR-aABR was used in neonatal intensive care units and in mountainous Kukës for all infants. Screeners' uptake and attitudes towards screening and quality of screening were assessed by distributing questionnaires and visiting the maternity hospitals. The result of screening, diagnostics, follow up and entry into early intervention were registered in a database and monitored. RESULTS: Screeners were keen to improve their skills in screening and considered NHS valuable for Albanian health care. The number of "fail" outcomes after the first screen was high initially but decreased to less than 10% after eight months. In 2018, 11,507 infants were born in the four participating maternity hospitals, 10,925 (94.9%) of whom were screened in the first step. For 486 infants the result of screening was not registered. For the first screen, ten parents declined, eight infants died and one infant was discharged before screening could be performed. In 1115 (10.2%) infants the test either could not be performed or the threshold was not reached; 361 (32,4%) of these did not attend the second screen. For the third screen 31 (34.4%) out of 90 did not attend. Reasons given were: parents declined (124), lived too far from screening location (95), their infant died (11), had other health issues (7), or was screened in private clinic (17), no reason given (138). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of NHS in Albania is feasible despite continuing challenges. Acceptance was high for the first screen. However, 32.4% of 1115 infants did not attend the second screen, after a "fail" outcome for the first test.

Effects of auditory and socio-demographic variables on discontinuation of hearing aid use among older adults with hearing loss fitted in the Chilean public health sector.

BACKGROUND: The percentage of older adults with hearing loss who stop using their hearing aids and the variables associated with this phenomenon have not been systematically investigated in South America. This problem is relevant to the region since countries such as Colombia, Brazil and Chile have public programmes that provide hearing aids to older adults. The aims of this study were to determine the percentage of older adults fitted with a hearing aid at a public hospital in Chile who subsequently stop using it and the auditory and socio-demographic variables associated with the hazard of discontinuing hearing aid use. METHODS: A group that included 355 older adults who had been fitted with a hearing aid was studied retrospectively. In a structured interview, participants were asked about socio-demographic variables and answered part of the Chilean National Survey on Health, evaluating self-perceived hearing loss and responding to questions about discontinuation of hearing aid use and their satisfaction with the device. Survival models were applied to determine the hazard of stopping hearing aid use in relation to the variables of interest. RESULTS: The rate of discontinuation of hearing aid use reached 21.7%. Older adults stopped using their hearing aids mainly during the first 5-6 months post-fitting, and then this number steadily increased. The income fifth quintile was 2.56 times less likely to stop using the hearing aid compared to the first. Those who self-reported that they could not hear correctly without the hearing aid were 2.62 times less likely to stop using it compared to those who reported normal hearing. The group that was very dissatisfied with the hearing aid was 20.86 times more likely to discontinue use than those who reported satisfaction with the device. CONCLUSIONS: Socio-demographic variables such as economic income and auditory factors such as self-perceived hearing loss and satisfaction with the device were significantly associated with the hazard of stopping hearing aid use. Self-perceived hearing loss should be considered part of the candidacy criteria for hearing aids in older adults in Chile and other (developing) countries.

Prevalence of permanent childhood hearing loss detected at the universal newborn hearing screen: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

CONTEXT: Permanent childhood hearing loss (PCHL) can affect speech, language, and wider outcomes. Adverse effects are mitigated through universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS) and early intervention. OBJECTIVE: We undertook a systematic review and meta-analysis to estimate prevalence of UNHS-detected PCHL (bilateral loss ≥26 dB HL) and its variation by admission to neonatal intensive care unit (NICU). A secondary objective was to report UNHS programme performance (PROSPERO: CRD42016051267). DATA SOURCES: Multiple electronic databases were interrogated in January 2017, with further reports identified from article citations and unpublished literature (November 2017). STUDY SELECTION: UNHS reports from very highly-developed (VHD) countries with relevant prevalence and performance data; no language or date restrictions. DATA EXTRACTION: Three reviewers independently extracted data and assessed quality. RESULTS: We identified 41 eligible reports from 32 study populations (1799863 screened infants) in 6195 non-duplicate references. Pooled UNHS-detected PCHL prevalence was 1.1 per 1000 screened children (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.9, 1.3; I2 = 89.2%). This was 6.9 times (95% CI: 3.8, 12.5) higher among those admitted to NICU. Smaller studies were significantly associated with higher prevalences (Egger's test: p = 0.02). Sensitivity and specificity ranged from 89-100% and 92-100% respectively, positive predictive values from 2-84%, with all negative predictive values 100%. LIMITATIONS: Results are generalisable to VHD countries only. Estimates and inferences were limited by available data. CONCLUSIONS: In VHD countries, 1 per 1000 screened newborns require referral to clinical services for PCHL. Prevalence is higher in those admitted to NICU. Improved reporting would support further examination of screen performance and child demographics.

Cost and outcome of a community-based paediatric hearing screening programme in rural India with application of tele-audiology for follow-up diagnostic hearing assessment.

OBJECTIVE: This study evaluated the cost and outcome of a community-based hearing screening programme in which village health workers (VHWs) screened children in their homes using a two-step DPOAE screening protocol. Children referred in a second screening underwent tele diagnostic ABR testing in a mobile tele-van using satellite connectivity or at local centre using broadband internet at the rural location. DESIGN: Economic analysis was carried out to estimate cost incurred and outcome achieved for hearing screening, follow-up diagnostic assessment and identification of hearing loss. Two-way sensitivity analysis determined the most beneficial cost-outcome. STUDY SAMPLE: 1335 children under 5 years of age underwent screening by VHWs. RESULTS: Nineteen of the 22 children referred completed the tele diagnostic evaluation. Five children were identified with hearing loss. The cost-outcomes were better when using broadband internet for tele-diagnostics. The use of least expensive human resources and equipment yielded the lowest cost per child screened (Rs.1526; $23; €21). When follow-up expenses were thus maximised, the cost per child was reduced considerably for diagnostic hearing assessment (Rs.102,065; $1532; €1368) and for the cost per child identified (Rs.388,237; $5826; €5204). CONCLUSION: Settings with constrained resources can benefit from a community-based programme integrated with tele diagnostics.

Comprehensive Hearing Aid Intervention at a Free Subspecialty Clinic.

Importance: Providing a model of a comprehensive free audiologic program may assist other health care professionals in developing their own similar program. Objective: To describe the structure, feasibility, and outcomes of a free subspecialty clinic providing hearing aids to develop a paradigm for other programs interested in implementing similar projects. Design, Setting, and Participants: A retrospective case series was conducted from September 1, 2013, through March 31, 2016. In a partnership between a free independent clinic for indigent patients and an academic medical center, 54 indigent patients were referred to the clinic for audiograms. A total of 50 of these patients had results of audiograms available for review and were therefore included in the study; 34 of these 50 patients were determined to be eligible for hearing aid fitting based on audiometric results. Exposures: Free audiometric testing, hearing aid fitting, and hearing aid donation. Main Outcomes and Measures: The number of hearing aids donated, number of eligible patients identified, number of patients fitted with hearing aids, and work effort (hours) and start-up costs associated with implementation of this program were quantified. Results: A total of 54 patients (31 women [57.4%] and 23 men [42.6%]; median age, 61 years; range, 33-85 years) had audiograms performed, and 84 hearing aids were donated to the program. The patients were provided with free audiograms, hearing aid molds, and hearing aid programming, as well as follow-up appointments to ensure continued proper functioning of their hearing aids. Since 2013, a total of 34 patients have been determined to be eligible for the free program and were offered hearing aid services. Of these, 20 patients (59%) have been fitted or are being fitted with free hearing aids. The value of services provided is estimated to be $2260 per patient. Conclusions and Relevance: It is feasible to provide free, comprehensive audiologic care, including hearing aids and fitting, in a well-established, free clinic model. The opportunity for indigent patients to use hearing aids at minimal personal cost is a major step forward in improving access to high-quality care.

Economic evaluation of long-term impacts of universal newborn hearing screening.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the long-term efficacious and economic impacts of universal newborn hearing screening (UNHS). DESIGN: An analytical Markov decision model was framed with two screening strategies: UNHS with transient evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE) test and automatic acoustic brainstem response (aABR) test against no screening. By estimating intervention and long-term costs on treatment and productivity losses and the utility of life years determined by the status of hearing loss, we computed base-case estimates of the incremental cost-utility ratios (ICURs). The scattered plot of ICUR and acceptability curve was used to assess the economic results of aABR versus TEOAE or both versus no screening. STUDY SAMPLE: A hypothetical cohort of 200,000 Taiwanese newborns. RESULTS: TEOAE and aABR dominated over no screening strategy (ICUR = $-4800.89 and $-4111.23, indicating less cost and more utility). Given $20,000 of willingness to pay (WTP), the probability of being cost-effective of aABR against TEOAE was up to 90%. CONCLUSIONS: UNHS for hearing loss with aABR is the most economic option and supported by economically evidence-based evaluation from societal perspective.

A programme of studies including assessment of diagnostic accuracy of school hearing screening tests and a cost-effectiveness model of school entry hearing screening programmes.

BACKGROUND: Identification of permanent hearing impairment at the earliest possible age is crucial to maximise the development of speech and language. Universal newborn hearing screening identifies the majority of the 1 in 1000 children born with a hearing impairment, but later onset can occur at any time and there is no optimum time for further screening. A universal but non-standardised school entry screening (SES) programme is in place in many parts of the UK but its value is questioned. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the diagnostic accuracy of hearing screening tests and the cost-effectiveness of the SES programme in the UK. DESIGN: Systematic review, case-control diagnostic accuracy study, comparison of routinely collected data for services with and without a SES programme, parental questionnaires, observation of practical implementation and cost-effectiveness modelling. SETTING: Second- and third-tier audiology services; community. PARTICIPANTS: Children aged 4-6 years and their parents. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Diagnostic accuracy of two hearing screening devices, referral rate and source, yield, age at referral and cost per quality-adjusted life-year. RESULTS: The review of diagnostic accuracy studies concluded that research to date demonstrates marked variability in the design, methodological quality and results. The pure-tone screen (PTS) (Amplivox, Eynsham, UK) and HearCheck (HC) screener (Siemens, Frimley, UK) devices had high sensitivity (PTS ≥ 89%, HC ≥ 83%) and specificity (PTS ≥ 78%, HC ≥ 83%) for identifying hearing impairment. The rate of referral for hearing problems was 36% lower with SES (Nottingham) relative to no SES (Cambridge) [rate ratio 0.64, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.59 to 0.69; p < 0.001]. The yield of confirmed cases did not differ between areas with and without SES (rate ratio 0.82, 95% CI 0.63 to 1.06; p = 0.12). The mean age of referral did not differ between areas with and without SES for all referrals but children with confirmed hearing impairment were older at referral in the site with SES (mean age difference 0.47 years, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.70 years; p < 0.001). Parental responses revealed that the consequences to the family of the referral process are minor. A SES programme is unlikely to be cost-effective and, using base-case assumptions, is dominated by a no screening strategy. A SES programme could be cost-effective if there are fewer referrals associated with SES programmes or if referrals occur more quickly with SES programmes. CONCLUSIONS: A SES programme using the PTS or HC screener is unlikely to be effective in increasing the identified number of cases with hearing impairment and lowering the average age at identification and is therefore unlikely to represent good value for money. This finding is, however, critically dependent on the results of the observational study comparing Nottingham and Cambridge, which has limitations. The following are suggested: systematic reviews of the accuracy of devices used to measure hearing at school entry; characterisation and measurement of the cost-effectiveness of different approaches to the ad-hoc referral system; examination of programme specificity as opposed to test specificity; further observational comparative studies of different programmes; and opportunistic trials of withdrawal of SES programmes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN61668996. FUNDING: This project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 36. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

The Cost-Effectiveness of Different Hearing Screening Strategies for 50- to 70-Year-Old Adults: A Markov Model.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the cost-effectiveness of screening 50- to 70-year-old adults for hearing loss in The Netherlands. We compared no screening, telephone screening, Internet screening, screening with a handheld screening device, and audiometric screening for various starting ages and a varying number of repeated screenings. METHODS: The costs per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY) for no screening and for 76 screening strategies were analyzed using a Markov model with cohort simulation for the year 2011. Screening was deemed to be cost-effective if the costs were less than €20,000/QALY. RESULTS: Screening with a handheld screening device and audiometric screening were generally more costly but less effective than telephone and Internet screening. Internet screening strategies were slightly better than telephone screening strategies. Internet screening at age 50 years, repeated at ages 55, 60, 65, and 70 years, was the most cost-effective strategy, costing €3699/QALY. At a threshold of €20,000/QALY, this strategy was with 100% certainty cost-effective compared with current practice and with 69% certainty the most cost-effective strategy among all strategies. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that Internet screening at age 50 years, repeated at ages 55, 60, 65, and 70 years, is the optimal strategy to screen for hearing loss and might be considered for nationwide implementation.

First estimates of the potential cost and cost saving of protecting childhood hearing from damage caused by congenital CMV infection.

BACKGROUND: Congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV) is an important cause of childhood deafness, which is modifiable if diagnosed within the first month of life. Targeted screening of infants who do not pass their newborn hearing screening tests in England is a feasible approach to identify and treat cases to improve hearing outcome. AIMS: To conduct a cost analysis of targeted screening and subsequent treatment for cCMV-related sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) in an, otherwise, asymptomatic infant, from the perspective of the UK National Health Service (NHS). METHODS: Using data from the newborn hearing screening programme (NHSP) in England and a recent study of targeted screening for cCMV using salivary swabs within the NHSP, we estimate the cost (in UK pounds (£)) to the NHS. The cost of screening (time, swabs and PCR), assessing, treating and following up cases is calculated. The cost per case of preventing hearing deterioration secondary to cCMV with targeted screening is calculated. RESULTS: The cost of identifying, assessing and treating a case of cCMV-related SNHL through targeted cCMV screening is estimated to be £6683. The cost of improving hearing outcome for an infant with cCMV-related SNHL through targeted screening and treatment is estimated at £14 202. CONCLUSIONS: The costs of targeted screening for cCMV using salivary swabs integrated within NHSP resulted in an estimate of cost per case that compares favourably with other screening programmes. This could be used in future studies to estimate the full economic value in terms of incremental costs and incremental health benefits.

[Cost-effectiveness of three-stage newborns hearing screening in Beijing].

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the cost-effectiveness of two-stage and three-stage hearing screenings for newborns. METHODS: Hearing screening was performed for the normal newborns born in 7 hospitals in Beijing from October 2010 to December 2012 by using two stage and three stage strategies as well as hearing diagnostic test, and the cost effectiveness evaluation of two strategies was conducted. The data about the cost of screening and diagnostic test were from the hospitals. The data about car fare and charge for loss of working time of parents were collected through questionnaire survey. The sensitivity was analyzed according to the compliance rate. RESULTS: A total of 62,695 newborns received initial hearing screening, 5,809 newborns failed, the positive rate was 9.30%. A total of 4,933 newborns received rescreening, 972 newborns failed, the positive rate was 19.70%. Among the newborns failed in rescreening, 412 were provided with hearing diagnostic test and 360 received diagnostic test. The diagnostic test indicated that the hearing of 217 newborns were abnormal (60.28%). A total of 276 newborns received the third screening, 163 newborns failed, in which 125 received diagnostic test and 112 had abnormal hearing (45 had moderate and above hearing impairment), the abnormal rate was 89.60%. The average cost for three-stage screening (37,242 yuan RMB per case) was higher than that for two-stage screening (19,985 yuan RMB per case). With the increase of compliance, the cost-effectiveness of three-stage screening increased. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of three-stage screening was influenced by screening compliance. It is recommended that three-stage screening strategy might be taken in area where the screening compliance rate is >90%.

Inventory of current EU paediatric vision and hearing screening programmes.

OBJECTIVE: To examine the diversity in paediatric vision and hearing screening programmes in Europe. METHODS: Themes for comparison of screening programmes derived from literature were used to compile three questionnaires on vision, hearing, and public health screening. Tests used, professions involved, age, and frequency of testing seem to influence sensitivity, specificity, and costs most. Questionnaires were sent to ophthalmologists, orthoptists, otolaryngologists, and audiologists involved in paediatric screening in all EU full-member, candidate, and associate states. Answers were cross-checked. RESULTS: Thirty-nine countries participated; 35 have a vision screening programme, 33 a nation-wide neonatal hearing screening programme. Visual acuity (VA) is measured in 35 countries, in 71% of these more than once. First measurement of VA varies from three to seven years of age, but is usually before age five. At age three and four, picture charts, including Lea Hyvarinen, are used most; in children over four, Tumbling-E and Snellen. As first hearing screening test, otoacoustic emission is used most in healthy neonates, and auditory brainstem response in premature newborns. The majority of hearing testing programmes are staged; children are referred after 1-4 abnormal tests. Vision screening is performed mostly by paediatricians, ophthalmologists, or nurses. Funding is mostly by health insurance or state. Coverage was reported as >95% in half of countries, but reporting was often not first-hand. CONCLUSION: Largest differences were found in VA charts used (12), professions involved in vision screening (10), number of hearing screening tests before referral (1-4), and funding sources (8).

Community-Based Hearing Screening of Disabled Elders Using the Thai-FMHT: Clinical Implications and Cost-Effectiveness.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of using the two-stage hearing test to detect hearing disabilities in the community elders. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A prospective cohort study was conducted in the Phuwieng District, Khon Kaen, Thailand from December 1, 2012 to January 31, 2013. All of the elders more than 60 years of age were invited. First, screening using the Thai version of five-minute hearing test (Thai-FMHT) with a score equal to or greater than 12 was included in the group and then given the next audiometric examination. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-eight elders were interested in this program, but only 192 subjects consented to participate in the entire study. Six participants withdrew before completing the protocol; therefore, 107 males and 79 females were included. The age ranged 60-92 years old. Only 152 participants (81.7%; 95% CI: 75.5-86.6%) had a hearing disability that could be rehabilitated using a hearing aid. The cost of hearing screening using this program was reduced from $114.15 to $28.60 per positive case with the need for hearing rehabilitation. CONCLUSION: The two-stage hearing screening using the Thai-FMHT followed by an audiometric examination was found to be a suitable test for community-based mass screening of hearing loss, particularly in an area with limited resources.

Effectiveness of questionnaires for screening hearing of school-age children: a comprehensive literature review.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to review the literature on the effectiveness of parent or teacher-completed questionnaires as a tool to screen school-aged children for permanent hearing loss. DESIGN: A rapid evidence assessment was completed to provide a summary of information published between 1980 and 2013 in English or Spanish. To identify relevant publications, a database search was conducted using nine databases. STUDY SAMPLE: Seven studies were identified for inclusion in the review. RESULTS: Authors of three of the studies recommended use of the questionnaire as a method for screening hearing in school-aged children, and authors of four of the studies did not recommend use of the questionnaire. However, only one of the seven studies provided good evidence that questionnaires are an effective way of identifying hearing loss among children. CONCLUSIONS: There is insufficient evidence that parent or teacher completed questionnaire screening can be reliably used to identify children in need of further hearing assessment. It is clear that more research is needed before concluding that questionnaires are an effective and low-cost tool for use to screen children for permanent hearing loss.

Results of a 1-year government-funded newborn hearing screening program in Taiwan.

OBJECTIVES/HYPOTHESIS: To establish an ideal operative procedure of universal newborn hearing screening and to investigate whether a government-funded program increases compliance with such screening. STUDY DESIGN: Individual cohort study. METHODS: Of the 3,373 neonates born at the Taipei City Hospital during the period August 2009 to July 2010, there were 3,361 who received hearing screening with automatic auditory brainstem response (AABR) 24 to 36 hours after birth. The cost of each procedure (US $16.70) was covered by the Taipei City Health Bureau. The control group comprised 6,582 neonates born at the same hospital during the period January 2003 to December 2004, of whom 5,749 had been screened with transient-evoked otoacoustic emission (TEOAE). The cost of each procedure (US $26.70) was paid by the parents of each newborn. RESULTS: The incidence of bilateral moderate to severe hearing impairment was 0.06% (two out of 3,361) and 0.10% (six out of 5,749) in the study and the control group, respectively. The incidence of unilateral hearing impairment was 0.09% (three out of 3,361) and 0.19% (11 out of 5,749) respectively. The coverage rate of the study was significantly higher than that of the control group (99.64% vs. 87.34%, P < .001). A significant decrease of the referral rate was achieved in the study group when compared with the control group (0.95% vs. 2.82%, P < .001). The follow-up rate of the study group was significantly higher than that of the control group (100.00% vs. 40.74%, P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The government-funded AABR program resulted in markedly better parental compliance with newborn hearing screening than the self-pay TEOAE screening program. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 2b.