Alternatives in screening at school entry: comparison of the childhood middle ear disease and hearing questionnaire (CMEDHQ) and the pure tone sweep test.

Abstract

Some health authorities in the UK are discontinuing hearing screening at school entry, mainly because the pure tone sweep test is under-specific (i.e. fails too many children) and thus leads to unnecessary and costly, but unproductive, follow-up assessment. A screening method with different properties such as a questionnaire could be a more cost-effective method of mass screening children. The MRC Institute of Hearing Research has developed and evaluated through several stages such a screening questionnaire (the Childhood Middle Ear Disease and Hearing Questionnaire (CMEDHQ), containing 11 scored questions under two broad headings: history and presentation of the disease, and consultation/treatment history. In a service-based evaluation, 2860 mainstream reception-year school children from two consecutive years, attending schools in south west Cumbria in the North-West Regional Health Authority received the sweep test and the CMEDHQ. (Although predominantly designed to detect middle ear problems, the questionnaire also has some potential to detect permanent hearing loss; thus providing a useful backstop for detection of permanent losses either missed or not present in earlier infancy.) The screening CMEDHQ obtained a very high response rate (90%). Follow-up included 235 control cases as well as all pure tone sweep test failures. Analysis, by use of a definition of cases conservative with respect to the sensitivity of the questionnaire, showed that the CMEDHQ has better specificity, but slightly lower sensitivity, than the pure tone sweep test for composite system decision (where 'case' = treated at ENT; 'non-case' = pass at whatever stage was reached before discharge). Follow-up indicated that the limited method available for assessing sensitivity might give an over-favourable view of the pure tone sweep test. Possible improvement of questionnaire sensitivity by further refinements is under examination. The findings show that it is worth conducting a fully parallel multi-district cost-effectiveness comparison of the pure tone sweep test versus the CMEDHQ.