Retrospective review highlights delayed diagnosis and referral in Thai children with hearing loss, indicating urgent system improvements.
Background: Congenital severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss (SNHL) may compromise early development, and timely cochlear implantation (CI) is essential; however, data from low- and middle-income countries, where universal newborn hearing screening is limited and referral is delayed, remain scarce. This study describes diagnostic timeliness and CI referral in Thai children with congenital severe-to-profound SNHL, and reports age-stratified pre-implant nonverbal developmental profiles as secondary contextual descriptive data. Methods: A retrospective chart review was conducted at Siriraj Hospital, Bangkok, Thailand. Children with congenital severe-to-profound SNHL who underwent pre-CI developmental or non-verbal cognitive assessments between January 2017 and December 2024 were enrolled. Data on age at diagnosis, age at CI evaluation and surgery, comorbidities, and performance on age-appropriate tools (Bayley-III, Mullen Scales of Early Learning, and TONI-4) were analyzed descriptively. No inferential statistical testing was performed. Results: Ninety-nine children were included (48.5% male); 14.1% had genetic syndromes and 22.2% had global developmental delay or intellectual disability. Median age at diagnosis was 1.83 years (IQR 0.75–2.50), and median age at CI evaluation was 2.75 years (IQR 1.82–3.92); 62.6% received CI at median age 3.00 years (IQR 2.00–3.77). Among infants <1 year, 72.7% scored at/above average on Bayley-III cognitive and fine motor scales; among children 1–6 years, 52.7% and 50.5% scored at/above average on MSEL visual reception and fine motor, respectively; among those ≥6 years, 66.7% achieved TONI-4 index scores ≥85. Conclusion: Diagnosis and CI referral in Thailand occurred well beyond internationally recommended ages, and age-group differences in non-verbal performance were observed, underscoring the need to strengthen early hearing detection and referral systems.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ritthita et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: