Consultation outcome

Newborn hearing screening standards: consultation

From:
Public Health England
Published
15 September 2021
This consultation has concluded

Detail of outcome

Following the consultation the programme team confirms that the proposed changes listed below for NHSP-S01, NHSP-S02a, NHSP-S02b, NHSP-S03a, NHSP-S03b and NHSP-S05 will be implemented from April 2022, with some minor revisions as detailed in this report. Feedback received during and after the consultation about the proposed changes to NHSP-S04 mean that the proposed changes to this standard will not be implemented. The definition of the timeline and acceptable and achievable thresholds for NHSP-S04 will remain the same.

The programme team would like to thank all responders to the consultation for their feedback.

Detail of feedback received

Responses

Survey responses

120 individuals accessed the survey, including:

  • 86 individuals that submitted responses, including:
    • 73 that responded as a healthcare professional
    • 12 that responded on behalf of an organisation
    • 1 that responded as a member of the public
  • 3 individuals that submitted more than one response – these individuals either had a dual role or responded as both an individual and on behalf of an organisation
  • 32 individuals that did not leave a response

Information on the roles of respondents and the organisations they work for is available.

Letter responses

Detailed letters were received from 3 separate professional bodies and each were provided with an individual response. Representatives from 2 of these bodies also submitted a response on behalf of the organisation using the survey.

Responses relating to congenital cytomegalovirus (cCMV)

The PHE newborn hearing screening programme (NHSP) team acknowledges the comments received regarding cCMV. However, these have been categorised as out of scope of the NHSP screening pathway.

The UK National Screening Committee (UK NSC) 2017 recommendation not to screen for cCMV has not changed. The programme team recognises the importance of early identification of cCMV and the proposed changes to standard NHSP-S04 aimed to improve timely attendance in audiology.

The comments received about cCMV are covered by the statement above and therefore no further responses are provided in each standard.

Summary of responses

The programme team received 355 comments and have responded to these in the ‘response, outcome and changes made’ sections against the relevant standard.

The NHSP standards consultation data report was produced post-consultation in response to comments received and to evidence how the data underpins the proposed changes.

NHSP-S01: coverage

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 78 5 3
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 81 2 3
Is the definition clear? 79 5 2
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 73 7 6
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 7 68 11

NHSP-S02a: test: well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at automated otoacoustic emission 1 (AOAE1) – hospital model services

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 75 1 10
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 71 5 10
Is the definition clear? 73 2 11
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 45 14 27
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 8 55 23

NHSP-S02b: test: well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at automated otoacoustic emission 1 (AOAE1) – community model services

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 71 1 14
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 66 2 18
Is the definition clear? 69 1 16
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 46 3 37
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 4 53 30

NHSP-S03a: test: referral rate to audiological assessment - hospital model services

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 73 1 12
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 67 6 13
Is the definition clear? 72 2 12
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 41 20 25
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 6 56 24

NHSP-S03b: test: referral rate to audiological assessment - community model services

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 70 1 15
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 65 4 17
Is the definition clear? 67 3 16
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 39 5 42
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 3 51 32

NHSP-S04: referral: time from screening outcome to first offered appointment for audiological assessment

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 71 2 13
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 67 6 13
Is the definition clear? 66 6 14
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 37 20 29
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 8 49 29

NHSP-S05: diagnosis/intervention: time from screening outcome to attendance at an audiological assessment appointment

Survey question Total of yes Total of no Total of blanks/don’t know
Is the description clear? 71 0 15
Have we clearly explained the rationale for this standard? 68 3 15
Is the definition clear? 71 0 15
Are the performance thresholds appropriate? 58 7 21
Do you think this standard disadvantages any of the eligible population, for example by age, gender, disability, deprivation? 7 51 28

NHSP-S01 – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • wording, grammar and length of the sentence make the description difficult to read

  • clarity about corrected gestational age

Response, outcome or changes made:

  • the wording has been changed to ‘The proportion of babies eligible for newborn hearing screening for whom the screening process is complete by ≤ 4 weeks (28 days) corrected age (in services which provide a hospital model - well babies) and neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) babies or by ≤ 5 weeks (35 days) corrected age (in services which provide a community model - well babies)’

  • hyperlink to be added that takes readers directly to the definition for corrected age

NHSP-S01 – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • adding to the overall vision/purpose may help to explain the aim

  • consider removing babies too ill to screen and those for whom consent is withdrawn from the eligible population

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the overall vision/purpose is provided in the NHSP operational guidance

  • babies too ill to screen or where consent is withdrawn remain eligible for screening and their inclusion is consistent with other screening programme coverage standards

NHSP-S01 – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • the definition was difficult to read

  • there are inconsistencies between the time from screening outcome to first audiological appointment

  • queries about eligibility and recording declines

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the wording of the definition has not been changed

  • there are no inconstancies in the timescales between this standard and NHSP-S04 or NHSP-S05

  • the current thresholds account for babies where screening is declined and are consistent with other screening programme coverage standards

NHSP-S01 – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • most of those commenting felt that the thresholds did not account for differences between NHSP services, for example the size of the service, rural versus urban and services with high numbers of NICU babies

  • some responders expressed concerns that the thresholds were set too high and did not reflect that screening is a choice or that parents may not bring their babies to appointments

  • two positive comments were supportive of the thresholds

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the thresholds are comparable to other screening programmes and are set to account for differences between services and for babies that do not attend (DNA) / was not brought (WNB)

  • the negative impact of COVID-19 on coverage, evident in the 2019 to 2020 data supports the decision not to make changes to the thresholds for this standard at present

  • the programme team would expect services to have a policy/guideline in place for babies that DNA / WNB and that the reasons for non-attendance are audited for service improvement purposes

  • a screening inequalities assessment was completed to support the standards review process

NHSP-S01 – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • the impact of differences between services on performance

  • potential inequalities

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • differences between services are accounted for in the performance thresholds and for babies that DNA / WNB

  • a screening inequalities assessment was completed to support the standards review process

NHSP-S02a – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • changing the wording of the description based on the list of possible outcomes from ‘babies who do not show a clear response in both ears’ to ‘babies who do not show a response in one or both ears’

  • the description was much clearer than in the 2018 standards

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • no changes made to the wording which is line with PHE recommended guidelines

NHSP-S02a – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • the wording of the sentence to say ‘the test outcome can be influenced if test conditions and screener technique are optimised’ is confusing as would normally say a result is affected if conditions are poorer

  • if consideration has been given to how services could meet the standard, delaying AOAE1 could impact on coverage

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • no changes made to the wording which is line with PHE recommended guidelines reflecting the positive impact of screener technique

  • the data review shows most services met the acceptable thresholds for NHSP-S01 and NHSP-S02 and that there is no correlation between a service’s coverage and the proportion of babies with a no clear response at AOAE1

NHSP-S02a – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • the denominator should be screens started not completed (NC) or not done (ND)
  • should not register as AOAE1

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the definition is in line with the ‘patient journey from screen to referral’ contained in the newborn hearing screening programme (NHSP) operational guidance

NHSP-S02a – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • services would find it a challenge to meet the proposed change to the achievable threshold, particularly when some services currently struggle to meet the acceptable threshold

  • whether it is possible to achieve the performance threshold when babies are screened prior to discharge due to environmental factors and differences between hospital services

  • it has taken commitment to reach this standard during COVID-19, changing the threshold may undo good practice in order to meet targets

  • lack of national data for services to benchmark their performance

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the proposed change to the achievable threshold is in line with service achievements demonstrated by performance data from the screening programme and is described in the data report

  • the performance for the acceptable standard remains unchanged
  • it is acknowledged that processes/pathways may need reviewing to meet this standard
  • the data showed COVID-19 has not adversely impacted performance: knowledge and education about the effect of screener technique may be a contributory factor
  • data for services to benchmark their performance is available in a national version of the performance and KPI reports, the annual newborn hearing screening data report and from the Screening Quality Assurance Service (SQAS)

NHSP-S02a – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • most comments related to differences between services, the impact of the environment and early discharge on obtaining a clear response at AOEA1

  • one responder suggested changing the acceptable level from 27% to 25% in line with the achievable threshold reduction

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • comments relating to differences between services, the impact of the environment and early discharges have been acknowledged above

  • data from the screening programme does not support a change to the acceptable threshold as described in the data report

NHSP-S02b – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • an explanation of ‘the community model’ is needed and how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S02b – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

The sentence ‘the test outcome can be influenced if test conditions and screener technique are optimised’ is confusing, as would normally say a result is affected if conditions are poorer.

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • no changes made

NHSP-S02b – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • an explanation of ‘the community model’ is needed and how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described (same comment received for NHSP-SO2a)

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S02b – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • responders said that they ‘don’t know’ as they were unfamiliar with the ‘community model’

  • positive comment supported the threshold changes as most babies are slightly older when screened with the ‘community model’

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • no changes made

NHSP-S02b – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • community model not their area of expertise

  • concern that changing the threshold will lead to delaying AOAE1 and impact on coverage

  • would like to see distribution against current standards

  • the community model is patient focussed with an increased likelihood of meeting the standard by obtaining a clear response

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the data report provides information on distribution against the current standards that shows that there is no correlation between a service’s coverage and the proportion of babies with a no clear response at AOAE1

NHSP-S03a – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • clarity was sought on how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S03a – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • not clear why a range has been added

  • should provide assurance that adequate numbers of a babies are referred for audiological assessment

  • concerns about site differences and population demographics impacting on the referral rate

  • no guidance provided on how less babies can be referred

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • a minimum achievable level of 0.5% has been introduced as there is a value below which a service may no longer refer enough babies to safely identify permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) in the screened population

  • the thresholds are set to account for differences between services and are consistent with other screening programme standards

  • the newborn hearing screening programme (NHSP) operational guidance is under review and will include information on factors that impact on referral rates

NHSP-S03a – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • clarity was sought on how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S03a – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • most comments received expressed concern about services ability to meet the performance thresholds and that they do not account for differences between services, early discharge, timing of the screen, population demographics and the impact of COVID-19

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the thresholds are set to account for differences between services and are consistent with other screening programme standards

  • the acceptable threshold has been changed to drive continuous quality improvement and is supported by data from the screening programme including the impact of COVID-19

  • data from the screening programme provides evidence that making changes to the thresholds for NHSP-S03 is unlikely to have any impact on services ability to meet the coverage threshold

NHSP-S03a – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • reducing the target may lead to delays in completing the screen particularly AABR and increase the number of screens completed in outpatients with an adverse impact on some populations if babies do not attend (are not brought)

  • does not account for differences between services and for services covering populations/communities with a higher prevalence of hearing loss

  • not clear why a range has been added

  • need to see the data

  • providing a greater than as well as less than value provides a more robust measurement than the previous less than only value

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the thresholds are set to account for differences between services and are consistent with other screening programme standards

  • a screening inequalities assessment was completed and considered babies that do not attend (are not brought)

  • changes to the thresholds are supported by data from the screening programme with a minimum achievable level of 0.5% added for both hospital and community models in recognition of the need for a minimum threshold to monitor if services are under referring

NHSP-S03b – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • clarity was sought on how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S03b – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • not clear why a range has been introduced

  • not clear how working out the proportion who require referral provides assurance that babies are appropriately referred

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • a minimum achievable level of 0.5% has been introduced as there is a value below which a service may no longer refer enough babies to safely identify permanent childhood hearing impairment (PCHI) in the screened population

  • the programme team is confident babies who have a PCHI are being referred appropriately from the screen

  • referral rates are sufficiently low that the programme team can be confident that babies are not referred unnecessarily

NHSP-S03b – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • clarity was sought on how services that screen in hospital and in the community are described

  • question about contraindicated babies and why they appear in the numerator but not the denominator

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • definitions for services providing a hospital based screening service (well babies), a community based screening service (well babies) and a NICU babies hospital and community model are given in the newborn hearing screening pathway requirements specification on GOV.UK
  • for clarity, the standard now lists babies that are excluded and not those included, unlike in the 2018 wording

NHSP-S03b – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • did not know if the thresholds were appropriate as they were not familiar with community model services

  • the reason behind changing the thresholds

Response, outcome and changes made:

NHSP-S03b – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • most were from individuals providing a hospital model saying they were not able to comment

  • concern that services may delay screening which could impact on coverage if babies do not attend (are not brought) to subsequent appointments

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • a screening inequalities assessment was completed and considered babies that do not attend (are not brought)

NHSP-S04 – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • not clear whether the appointment should occur within 3 weeks or the offer of appointment should be made within 3 weeks

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • no changes made

NHSP-S04 – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • reduction in the timescale unlikely to influence attendance by 4 weeks as audiology services may not be able to offer a further appointment additionally impacted by parental choice

  • benefit in reducing the timescale is lost by changing the performance threshold

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the change to the standard could assist services to offer an appointment in a timescale that is more likely to meet the attendance timescales for NHSP-S05 if parents cancel the initial appointment or babies do not attend (are not brought)

NHSP-S04 – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • changing the timescale does not consider parental choice

  • the explanation for the numerator is not clear

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the data report demonstrates this can be achieved, with 69.9% of babies currently offered an appointment within 3 weeks

  • comment about the numerator acknowledged – no change made

NHSP-S04 – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • most responders expressed concern about the reduction in the timescale for the offer of an appointment due to lack of flexibility, staffing shortages additional pressure on services and availability of appointments

  • some requested the rationale for the change

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • data from the screening programme supported a change to this standard and could assist services to offer an appointment in a timescale that is more likely to meet the attendance timescales for NHSP-S05 if parents cancel the initial appointment or babies do not attend/are not brought

  • the impact of COVID-19 on audiological services was acknowledged when setting the threshold

  • the programme team acknowledges that processes/pathways may need to be reviewed to meet this standard

NHSP-S04 – positive impact on NHSP-S05

Summary of the comments received

  • most comments were from individuals who felt that the change would not improve local services’ ability to meet NHSP-S05 and would put additional pressure on audiological services

  • of the comments supporting the change, one service already appoints in the time scale, one thought it a positive while one felt the timescale should have been reduced to 14 days

Response, outcome and changes made

  • comments acknowledged

NHSP-S04 – other comments

Summary of the comments received

  • most comments expressed concern about the impact of the change on audiological services

  • one responder felt that the standard should not exist while another that it should become a key performance indicator (KPI)

Response, outcome and changes made

  • comments acknowledged

NHSP-S04 – update post consultation

The programme team has reconsidered this standard following the consultation feedback from the survey and professional bodies. Changing the timescale could have a clinical impact with increasing numbers of babies with a type of hearing loss on the national IT system of ‘not yet determined’ or ‘conductive hearing loss’ needing additional appointments.

The programme team has completed further data analysis in response to the additional comments received. To address these concerns the programme team met with the 3 professional organisations again. It is now agreed that the timescale and thresholds for this standard will not be changed.

The programme team will work together with the professional bodies and local NHSP services to better understand why standard NHSP-S05 is not met. The programme team will also work alongside SQAS and commissioners to support local services and determine how improvements can be made.

NHSP-S05 – description

Summary of the comments received:

  • no comments were received

NHSP-S05 – rationale

Summary of the comments received:

  • no comments were received

NHSP-S05 – definitions

Summary of the comments received:

  • no comments were received

NHSP-S05 – thresholds

Summary of the comments received:

  • small numbers can have a significant impact on performance with standards not always met due to factors outside of the services control such as parents cancelling appointments / not bringing babies and readmission to hospital

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the change to timescale for NHSP-S04 was proposed to assist in offering an appointment in a timescale that is more likely to meet the attendance timescales for NHSP-S05 if parents cancel the initial appointment or babies do not attend (was not brought)

  • services should report mitigations for babies who do not meet the attendance timescales

  • the programme team would expect services to have a policy/guideline in place for babies that do not attend (are not brought) and that the reasons for non-attendance is audited

NHSP-S05 – other comments

Summary of the comments received:

  • most comments related to differences between services and the impact on performance when babies do not attend (are not brought)

  • positive comments received that the standard was not changing and that a devolved administration was planning to adopt the standards

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • a screening inequalities assessment was completed before the external consultation to support the standards review process

Other comments – general

Summary of the comments received:

  • NHSP-S04 and NHSP-S05 should be audiology service standards

  • small numbers and differences between services can have an impact on a service ability to meet a performance threshold (NHSP-S01 and NHSP-S05)

  • the inclusion of monitoring performance post referral

  • further guidance required on the timing of the screen

  • concerns that Public Health England are prioritising performance over patient choice and patient care

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the inclusion of standards NHSP-S04 and NHSP-S05 in the screening pathway is consistent with other screening programme standards for assurance that the screening pathway ends when the baby attends a referral appointment

  • thresholds are set to account for differences in services, additionally mitigations should be provided when babies are not screened or do not attend within the timescale

  • monitoring performance post referral is out of scope of the screening pathway, the omission is consistent with other screening programme standards

  • guidance regarding when to start the screen is available in the operational guidance, chapter 6 (patient journey from screen to referral)

  • the purpose of reviewing standards and setting performance thresholds is to drive continuous quality improvement and is supported by screening data from the programme

Potential gaps in standards
Yes 10
No 51
Blank/don’t know 25

Summary of the comments received:

  • a standard for completion of screen by 3 months would be useful

  • standards should extend to first fitting of the hearing aid

  • any outcome meaning a baby was not screened should be considered separately, not included in NHSP-S01

Response, outcome and changes made:

  • the screening inequalities assessment recommended scoping the potential of a coverage standard for babies up to 3 months of age in the next standards review

  • screening standards look at parts of the screening pathway that assess the screening process and allow for continuous improvement, management in audiology and following a diagnosis of permanent childhood hearing impairment is outside of the pathway

  • Public Health England (PHE) have adopted a consistent approach for writing coverage standards across screening programmes

Screening inequalities

Summary of the comments received:

Comments were similar for each standard, including:

  • issues with access to services due to cultural reasons, deprivation, transport issues/costs and frequency of clinics

  • potential that families may not return for subsequent appointments if the screen is not completed prior to discharge / referral to audiology is required

  • longer timeframe for community testing means management of hearing loss may be delayed

Response, outcome and changes made:

A screening inequalities assessment was completed before the external consultation to support the standards review process. Consideration was given to all standards to establish whether differences in the distribution of health determinants – including gender, age, ethnicity, socioeconomic status and other protected characteristics – and screening outcomes could be considered avoidable and unfair.

The comments raised during the consultation were considered at the time and the following recommended actions made:

  • look at what proportion of babies are being screened by 3 weeks at a population level to support a review of the timescale for recording a conclusive result or a screening outcome (NHSP-S01)

  • gain a greater understanding of the impact of health inequalities by mapping coverage against socio-economic deprivation indices by Lower Super Output Area and ethnicity to scope the potential for a future health inequalities related standard

  • review coverage for babies aged 3 months (including movers in once captured on SMaRT4Hearing) to scope the potential of a coverage standard in the next standards review to capture babies aged ≥ 4 weeks (hospital model) or ≥ 5 weeks (community model) and less than 3 months

  • support providers to consider impact of screening inequalities within an audit schedule particularly babies not screened within the current performance timescales and declines (NHSP S01) and was not brought (NHSP-S01, NHSP-S05)

  • review any comments about inequalities received as part of the external consultation

Original consultation

Summary

The newborn hearing screening programme (NHSP) consulted on proposed changes to NHSP standards

This consultation ran from
to

Consultation description

The NHSP programme aims to support health professionals and commissioners in providing high quality NHSP screening services. This involves the development and regular review of quality standards against which data is collected and reported annually. The standards provide a defined set of measures that providers should meet to ensure local programmes are safe and effective. They also help to drive improvement. The NHSP standards were last revised in 2018 following a comprehensive review.

A task and finish group was established in 2020 to carry out a major review of the 2018 NHSP standards covering the screening journey up to and including the point of referral to audiology and entry into audiological assessment. The group reviewed the 2018 standards and identified necessary changes and areas to target for improvement. Performance data for each screening year from 1 March 2017 to 30 April 2020 was reviewed. A screening inequalities assessment was completed to consider the impact on the eligible population. The group drafted proposed revisions which were presented to the Screening Data Group before going out to wider consultation.

NHSP consulted on 7 standards using a survey. The standards document and a link to the survey were published on the PHE Screening blog. The consultation was open for 4 weeks and closed on 24 June 2021. Participants could answer questions on all of the standards or select standards of interest.

The standards

The existing NHSP standards are:

  • NHSP-S01: coverage

  • NHSP-S02a: test – well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at automated otoacoustic emission 1 (AOAE1) – hospital model services

  • NHSP-S02b: test – well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at AOAE1 – community model services

  • NHSP-S03a: test – referral rate to audiological assessment – hospital model services

  • NHSP-S03b: test – referral rate to audiological assessment – community model services

  • NHSP-S04: referral – time from screening outcome to first offered appointment for audiological assessment

  • NHSP-S05: diagnosis/intervention – time from screening outcome to attendance at an audiological assessment appointment

Proposed changes

The proposed changes were:

  • the title, description, rationale, definition, caveats, data collection and reporting and the reporting periods would be updated to incorporate specific changes and bring the wording in line with PHE recommended guidelines and other screening programme standards

  • the use of corrected age would be applied to all babies whose gestational age is ≤ 40 weeks at birth

All proposed changes were published on the PHE Screening blog.

Summary of the proposed revisions to the NHSP programme standard thresholds for consultation

NHSP-S01: coverage

Hospital April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Timescale 4 weeks corrected age Yes -
Acceptable ≥98.0% Yes -
Achievable ≥99.5% Yes -
Community April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Timescale 5 weeks corrected age Yes -
Acceptable ≥98.0% Yes -
Achievable ≥99.5% Yes -

NHSP-S02a: test – well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at AOAE1 – hospital model services

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Acceptable ≤27.0% Yes -
Achievable ≤22.0% No ≤20.0%

NHSP-S02b: test – well babies who do not show a clear response in both ears at AOAE1 – community model services

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Acceptable ≤15.0% No ≤14.0%
Achievable ≤13.5% No ≤12.0%

NHSP-S03a: test – referral rate to audiological assessment – hospital model services

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Acceptable ≤3.0% No >2.0% to ≤2.8%
Achievable ≤2.0% No ≥0.5% to ≤2.0%

NHSP-S03b: test – referral rate to audiological assessment – community model services

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Acceptable ≤1.6% No >1.3% to ≤1.6%
Achievable ≤1.3% No ≥0.5% to ≤1.3%

NHSP-S04: referral: time from screening outcome to first offered appointment for audiological assessment

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Timescale 4 weeks corrected age No from 4 to 3 weeks corrected age
Acceptable ≥97.0% No ≥90.0%
Achievable ≥99.0% No ≥97.0%

NHSP-S05: diagnosis/intervention: time from screening outcome to attendance at an audiological assessment appointment

April 2018 Remain the same Proposed change to
Timescale 4 weeks corrected age Yes -
Acceptable ≥90.0% Yes -
Achievable ≥95.0% Yes -

Documents

NHSP standards consultation: data report

HTML

NHSP standards consultation: respondent demographics

HTML

Published 15 September 2021

Related content