RESUMO
The prevalence of hearing loss is 0.09-2.3% in low risk neonates, and 0.3-14.1% in the high-risk population. The treatment requires early identification by neonatal hearing screening and early rehabilitation. OAE (oto-acoustic emission) and ABR (Auditory Brain Response) are the two objective tests used to evaluate hearing loss in neonates. OAE tests the biological response of the cochlea to auditory stimuli. ABR tests the auditory pathway. The aim is to estimate hearing loss in high-risk neonates using the Distortion Product Oto- acoustic emission (DP OAE) and to correlate the associated high-risk factors. This was a cross-sectional study conducted between March 2021 to September 2022. Newborns satisfying the inclusion criteria were included in the study. DP- OAE is performed to screen for hearing loss within 48 h of birth. Infants failing the first screening test are then examined for treatable causes and then repeated at 2 weeks. Newborns who fail the second DP-OAE are subjected to ABR for confirmation of hearing loss. A total of 100 high risk neonates underwent hearing screen using DP-OAE. Most common risk factors seen in our study are prematurity (22%), Low birth weight (< 2.5 kg) (20%), Neonatal Hyperbilirubinemia (17%), Maternal risk factors (GDM) (14%). Most neonates with prematurity failed the hearing test with significant p-value of 0.05. DP- OAE test can be successfully implemented as newborn hearing screening method, for early detection of hearing impairment to achieve the high quality standard of screening programs.
RESUMO
Introduction The radial bone and the radioulnar joint are vital for the physiological and physical stability of the elbow. The prostheses and plates used in cases of radius fracture are designed based on the morphology of the Western population. This could result in a bone-implant mismatch when applied to the Indian population, resulting in complications. Hence, the study aimed to record the normal values of radius morphology in the Indian population. Methods A total of 30 (eight male and seven female) freshly frozen cadaveric bilateral upper limbs were chosen. Cadavers with previous surgical scars, deformities, and congenital defects of the upper limb were excluded. The radius was excised, and morphometric parameters were measured with a non-elastic measuring tape and a digital caliper and recorded using GeoGebra software. Results All measuring parameters exhibited no significant difference between the right and left side of the bone (p > 0.05), whereas the difference between males and females for most parameters was statistically significant (p < 0.05). The mean difference between the anteroposterior (AP) diameter and transverse diameter of the radial head for the study sample was 0.89 ± 0.06 mm. Thus, the AP diameter was 4% greater than the transverse diameter. The head of the radius was observed to be almost round. The degree of extent of the safe zone was 124.64°, with an average safe arc length of 3.27 ± 0.55 cm. Conclusion The morphometric measurements of the radius in the Indian population are different from the Western population.
