OBJECTIVE: To estimate the cost and cost-effectiveness of universal newborn
hearing screening.
STUDY DESIGN AND SETTING: Decision analysis model utilizing the hospital pe
rspective. This model evaluated 4 distinct protocols for screening a fixed
and defined hypothetical cohort of newborn infants.
OUTCOME MEASURES: Cost of screening and the number of infants with hearing
loss identified through universal screening.
RESULTS: Otoacoustic emissions testing at birth followed by repeat testing
at follow up demonstrated the lowest cost ($13 per infant) and had the lowe
st cost-effectiveness ratio ($5100 per infant with hearing loss identified)
. Screening auditory brainstem evoked response testing at birth with no scr
eening test at follow-up was the only protocol with greater effectiveness,
but it also demonstrated the highest cost ($25 per infant) and highest cost
-effectiveness ratio ($9500 per infant with hearing loss identified). These
findings were robust to sensitivity analysis, including best-case and wors
t-case estimation. The prevalence of hearing loss and the fraction of infan
ts returned for follow-up testing had a large impact on the absolute level,
but not relative level of protocol cost and cost-effectiveness.
CONCLUSION: The otoacoustic emissions testing protocol should be selected b
y screening programs concerned with cost and cost-effectiveness, although t
here are certain caveats to consider.
SIGNIFICANCE: The most significant barriers to implementation of universal
newborn hearing screening programs have been financial, and this study comp
ares the most common protocols currently in use. This study can assist prog
ram directors not only in the decision to initiate universal screening but
also in their choice of screening protocol.