Cost-effectiveness of screening for permanent hearing loss in children at school entry

The diagnostic accuracy of hearing tests and cost-effectiveness of school entry hearing screening programmes

Status

Active, not recruiting

Phases

Unknown

Study type

Observational

Source

ISRCTN

Registry ID

ISRCTN61668996

Enrollment

570

Registered

2012-04-27

Start date

2013-02-19

Completion date

Unknown

Last updated

2017-04-18

For informational purposes only — not medical advice. Sourced from public registries and may not reflect the latest updates. Terms

Conditions

Permanent sensorinerual or conductive hearing loss Ear, Nose and Throat Hearing loss, unspecified

Interventions

Study 1 will look at which of two different ways of doing the screen is more accurate in correctly identifying children with and without a hearing loss. Given the small numbers, it would need a very l

Eligibility

Sex/Gender

All

Inclusion criteria

Inclusion criteria: Study 1: 1. Case children aged 4-6 years with a confirmed sensorineural or permanent conductive hearing loss either bilaterally (up to 60dB) or unilaterally (any level) 2. Control children aged 4-6 years with no identified hearing loss Study 2: All children aged 4 years or older referred to the 2nd tier audiology service in Cambridgeshire from October 2007 to June 2014 Study 3: All children referred to the Nottingham Audiology Service as a result of failing the school entry hearing screen, and their parents Study 4: All children in the reception classes of participating schools in Nottinghamshire

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion criteria: Children whose parents do not agree to the child taking part (Studies 1 and 4)

Design outcomes

Primary

Measure	Time frame
Study 1: For both screening tests will be a ?pass? or ?refer? as defined by the protocol compared with the result of the gold-standard pure-tone audiogram which provides a measure of hearing level on the decibel scale. Study 2 Age of referral Study 3 Age at referral and the costs both to the service and the families of referral through to definitive identification of hearing loss or discharge Study 4 The mean cost per child of implementing each of the two test technologies. Costs will include the staff type, grade and time taken in conducting the test plus the cost of the equipment. For the purposes of this study we will assume that all other things between the two tests are equal i.e. travel time of screening to visit the school, set up time to organise the children etc.	—

Measure

Time frame

Study 1: For both screening tests will be a ?pass? or ?refer? as defined by the protocol compared with the result of the gold-standard pure-tone audiogram which provides a measure of hearing level on the decibel scale. Study 2 Age of referral Study 3 Age at referral and the costs both to the service and the families of referral through to definitive identification of hearing loss or discharge Study 4 The mean cost per child of implementing each of the two test technologies. Costs will include the staff type, grade and time taken in conducting the test plus the cost of the equipment. For the purposes of this study we will assume that all other things between the two tests are equal i.e. travel time of screening to visit the school, set up time to organise the children etc.

—

Secondary

Measure	Time frame
Study 2: The incidence of newly identified hearing loss in children, the referral route and aetiology of any hearing loss	—

Countries

United Kingdom

Outcome results

None listed

Source: ISRCTN (via WHO ICTRP) · Data processed: Mar 13, 2026