论文部分内容阅读
目的比较分析不同筛查技术(DPOAE/AABR/DPOAE联合AABR),找到更合适的筛查方法,为筛查出听力障碍的新生儿提供最有效的依据,达到早期诊断和早期干预。方法在厦门市妇幼保健院出生并接受新生儿听力筛查的研究对象,于新生儿出生3~7天初次筛查,初次筛查未通过的患儿在42天进行复筛,复筛分为3组,第1组为单独DPOAE筛查,第2组为单纯AABR筛查,第3组为DPOAE联合AABR筛查,复筛仍未通过患儿于3月龄进行第1次听力学综合评估,抽取1000例数据进行统计分析,比较3种方法的准确性。结果根据统计学分析,3组之间有统计学意义(P<0.05)。DPOAE及AABR联合筛查的阳性率最高,假阳性率最低,其次是AABR,最后是DPOAE。结论在新生儿听力复筛查中运用DPOAE与AABR联合筛查最准确,其次是使用AABR,最后是DPOAE。
Objective To compare and analyze different screening techniques (DPOAE / AABR / DPOAE combined with AABR) and find a more suitable screening method to provide the most effective basis for screening newborns with hearing impairment to achieve early diagnosis and early intervention. Methods Subjects born in Xiamen MCH and receiving neonatal hearing screening were initially screened 3 to 7 days after birth, and those who failed the first screening were re-screened on day 42 for screening 3 groups, the first group was DPOAE screening alone, the second group was simple AABR screening, the third group was DPOAE combined with AABR screening, the re-screening did not pass the children at 3 months of age at the first comprehensive audiological assessment , Extracted 1000 cases of data for statistical analysis, comparing the accuracy of the three methods. Results According to statistical analysis, there was a statistically significant difference between the three groups (P <0.05). DPOAE and AABR joint screening of the highest positive rate, the lowest false positive rate, followed by AABR, and finally DPOAE. Conclusion The combination of DPOAE and AABR in neonatal hearing screening is most accurate, followed by AABR and finally DPOAE.