A recent report from the
National Hearing Health Campaign 2003
tells us that efforts toward Universal Newborn Hearing Screening (UNHS) have reached
86.5% of infants in the US, up from 25% in 1999. The report also showed that 40 states
are screening 90% or more infants; 5 states are screening 80–90% (IA, LA, MD, PA,
and SD); and 6 states, less than 79% (AK, CA, NH, ND, OH, and WA-legislation pending).
The Deafness Research Foundation funds the National Campaign for Hearing Health, a
nationwide effort to identify Americans with significant hearing loss and support
efforts for appropriate treatment. The foundation noted in this report that the Bush
Administration had eliminated funding in its FY2004 budget for hearing screening and
treatment programs. This is particularly troubling since, according to this foundation,
hearing loss is the most common birth defect, with 33 affected infants born every
day in our nation.To read this article in full you will need to make a payment
Purchase one-time access:
Academic & Personal: 24 hour online accessCorporate R&D Professionals: 24 hour online accessOne-time access price info
- For academic or personal research use, select 'Academic and Personal'
- For corporate R&D use, select 'Corporate R&D Professionals'
Subscribe:
Subscribe to Journal of Pediatric Nursing: Nursing Care of Children and FamiliesAlready a print subscriber? Claim online access
Already an online subscriber? Sign in
Register: Create an account
Institutional Access: Sign in to ScienceDirect
References
- Update on the development and use of viral and bacterial vaccines for the prevention of acute otitis media.Allergy & Asthma Proceedings. 2001; 22: 353-357
- Neonatal screening for hearing impairment.Lancet. 2000; 355: 513-514
- Projected cost-effectiveness of statewide universal newborn hearing screening.Pediatrics. 2002; 110: 855-864
- What’s happening. 2003 (Available: http://www.hearingheatlh.net/cms/index.cfm?displayArticle=47. Accessed 7/17/2003.)
- New interventions in hearing impairment.British Medical Journal. 2000; 320: 622-625
Article info
Identification
Copyright
© 2003 Elsevier Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
