Provider Perspectives: Identification and Follow-up of Infants who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing
Advanced Search
Select up to three search categories and corresponding keywords using the fields to the right. Refer to the Help section for more detailed instructions.

Search our Collections & Repository

All these words:

For very narrow results

This exact word or phrase:

When looking for a specific result

Any of these words:

Best used for discovery & interchangable words

None of these words:

Recommended to be used in conjunction with other fields

Language:

Dates

Publication Date Range:

to

Document Data

Title:

Document Type:

Library

Collection:

Series:

People

Author:

Help
Clear All

Query Builder

Query box

Help
Clear All

For additional assistance using the Custom Query please check out our Help Page

Provider Perspectives: Identification and Follow-up of Infants who Are Deaf or Hard of Hearing



Public Access Version Available on: April 28, 2024, 12:00 AM
Please check back on the date listed above.
  • English

  • Details:

    • Alternative Title:
      Am J Perinatol
    • Description:
      Objective

      Without timely screening, diagnosis, and intervention, hearing loss can cause significant delays in a child’s speech, language, social, and emotional development. In 2019, Texas had nearly twice the average rate of loss to follow-up (LFU) or loss to documentation (LTD; i.e., missing documentation of services received) among infants who did not pass their newborn hearing screening compared to the United States overall (51.1 vs. 27.5%). We aimed to identify factors contributing to LFU/LTD among infants who do not pass their newborn hearing screening in Texas.

      Study Design

      Data were collected through semistructured qualitative interviews with 56 providers along the hearing care continuum, including hospital newborn hearing screening program staff, audiologists, primary care physicians, and early intervention (EI) program staff located in three rural and urban public health regions in Texas. Following recording and transcription of the interviews, we used qualitative data analysis software to analyze themes using a conventional content analysis approach.

      Results

      Frequently cited barriers included problems with family access to care, difficulty contacting patients, problems with communication between providers and referrals, lack of knowledge among providers and parents, and problems using the online reporting system. Providers in rural areas more often mentioned problems with family access to care and contacting families compared to providers in urban areas.

      Conclusion

      These findings provide insight into strategies that public health professionals and health care providers can use to work together to help further increase the number of children identified early who may benefit from EI services.

    • Pubmed ID:
      36037854
    • Pubmed Central ID:
      PMC10140186
    • Document Type:
    • Collection(s):
    • Main Document Checksum:
    • File Type:
    • Supporting Files:
      No Additional Files

    More +

    You May Also Like

    Checkout today's featured content at stacks.cdc.gov