Infants with Congenital Diseases Identified through Newborn Screening—United States, 2018–2020

Newborn screening (NBS) is a state or territory-based public health system that screens newborns for congenital diseases that typically do not present with clinical symptoms at birth but can cause significant mortality and morbidity if not detected or treated quickly. NBS continues to be one of the most successful public health interventions in the US, providing early detection and intervention to all infants. The increase in overall birth prevalence of core Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) diseases detected via dried blood spot (DBS) specimens from 2015–2017 (17.50–18.31 per 10,000) to 2018–2020 (20.07 per 10,000), as reported into the APHL NewSTEPs database, affirms the importance and impact of NBS programs. This report presents aggregate numbers and birth prevalence of diseases detected by DBS on the RUSP from 2018–2020, including data from fifty US states and two territories

Implementation of Newborn Screening for Conditions in the United States First Recommended during 2010–2018

The Recommended Uniform Screening Panel (RUSP) is the list of conditions recommended by the US Secretary of Health and Human Services for inclusion in state newborn screening (NBS). During 2010–2022, seven conditions were added to the RUSP: severe combined immunodeficiency (SCID) (2010), critical congenital heart disease (CCHD) (2011), glycogen storage disease, type II (Pompe) (2015), mucopolysaccharidosis, type I (MPS I) (2016), X-linked adrenoleukodystrophy (X-ALD) (2016), spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) (2018), and mucopolysaccharidosis, type II (MPS II) (2022). The adoption of SCID and CCHD newborn screening by programs in all 50 states and three territories (Washington, D.C.; Guam; and Puerto Rico) took 8.6 and 6.8 years, respectively. As of December 2022, 37 programs screen for Pompe, 34 for MPS I, 32 for X-ALD, and 48 for SMA. The pace of implementation based on the average additional number of NBS programs per year was most rapid for SMA (11.3), followed by CCHD (7.8), SCID (6.2), MPS I (5.4), Pompe (4.9), and X-ALD (4.7)

Analyzing Patterns in NewSTEPs Site Review Recommendations: Practical Applications for Newborn Screening Programs

The Newborn Screening Technical assistance and Evaluation Program (NewSTEPs) conducts non-regulatory site reviews of state newborn screening programs in the US with the goal of providing comprehensive reports and recommendations to support quality improvements within the system. A detailed coding and qualitative analysis of data extracted from reports of seven programs visited between 2012 and 2017, of thirteen pre-site visit surveys completed by state newborn screening programs, and of information from interviews conducted with three site review experts revealed four common themes that exist across states within the national newborn screening system. These themes include opportunities to implement improvements in: (1) communications inside and outside of the state newborn screening program, (2) education, (3) information technology, and (4) operations. The cross-cutting recommendations provided by NewSTEPs within the comprehensive site review reports may prove valuable for all state programs to consider and to incorporate as quality improvement measures in the absence of a full site review. The analysis of the site review process and recommendations identified important opportunities for improvement, many of which were previously unknown to be common across programs, and also provided affirmation of known challenges

Implementing Statewide Newborn Screening for New Disorders: U.S. Program Experiences

Data were collected from 39 newborn screening (NBS) programs to provide insight into the time and factors required for implementing statewide screening for Pompe, Mucopolysaccharidosis type I (MPS I), adrenoleukodystrophy (ALD), and Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA). Newborn screening program readiness to screen statewide for a condition was assessed using four phases: (1) approval to screen; (2) laboratory, follow-up, and information technology capabilities; (3) education; and (4) implementation of statewide newborn screening. Seventeen states (43.6%) reached statewide implementation for at least one new disorder. Those states reported that it took 28 months to implement statewide screening for Pompe and MPS I, 30.5 months for ALD, and 20 months for SMA. Using survival curve analysis to account for states still in progress, the estimated median time to statewide screening increased to 75 months for Pompe and 66 months for MPS I. When looking at how long each readiness component took to complete, laboratory readiness was one of the lengthier processes, taking about 39 months. Collaboration with other NBS programs and hiring were the most frequently mentioned facilitators to implementing newborn screening. Staffing or inability to hire both laboratory and follow-up staff was the most frequently mentioned barrier

NewSTEPs: The Establishment of a National Newborn Screening Technical Assistance Resource Center

As newborn screening (NBS) programs in the US implement expanded screening panels, utilize emerging technologies and identify areas for improvement, the need to establish and maintain a community engagement based national technical assistance center becomes apparent. The Newborn Screening Technical assistance and Evaluation Program (NewSTEPs)—a program of the Association of Public Health Laboratories (APHL) in partnership with the Colorado School of Public Health (ColoradoSPH), offers expertise in newborn screening program development, member connection, data analysis, and program evaluation. NewSTEPs provides a secure online data repository designed to collect comprehensive data on newborn screening programs in three strata: state profiles (description of each state program including program hours, fees, and disorders screened), quality indicators (metrics of program performance encompassing screening accuracy and timeliness) and NBS public health surveillance case definitions. NewSTEPs was created in 2012 under a cooperative agreement with the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Maternal and Child Health Bureau (MCHB). Successful activities of NewSTEPs have resulted in the establishment of a technical assistance resource center and the organization of a network of newborn screening experts. In addition, NewSTEPs coordinates efforts with other federally funded programs in order to maximize resources and to ensure a unified approach to data collection and information sharing

COVID-19 Pandemic-Related Impacts on Newborn Screening Public Health Surveillance

Newborn screening (NBS) is an essential public health service that performs screening to identify those newborns at increased risk for a panel of disorders, most of which are genetic. The goal of screening is to link those newborns at the highest risk to timely intervention and potentially life-saving treatment. The global COVID-19 pandemic led to disruptions within the United States public health system, revealing implications for the continuity of newborn screening laboratories and follow-up operations. The impacts of COVID-19 across different states at various time points meant that NBS programs impacted by the pandemic later could benefit from the immediate experiences of the earlier impacted programs. This article will review the collection, analysis, and dissemination of information during the COVID-19 pandemic facilitated by a national, centralized technical assistance and resource center for NBS programs

Evaluating Harms in the Assessment of Net Benefit: A Framework for Newborn Screening Condition Review

BACKGROUND: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children ( Advisory Committee ) makes recommendations to the HHS Secretary regarding addition of new conditions to the national Recommended Uniform Screening Panel for newborns. The Advisory Committee\u27s decision-making process includes assessing the net benefit of screening for nominated conditions, informed by systematic evidence reviews generated by an independent Condition Review Workgroup. The evidence base regarding harms associated with screening for specific conditions is often more limited than that for benefits. PROCEDURES: The process for defining potential harms from newborn screening reviewed the frameworks from other public health evidence-based review processes, adapted to newborn screening by experts in systematic review, newborn screening programs and bioethics, with input from and approval by the Advisory Committee. MAIN FINDINGS: To support the Advisory Committee\u27s review of nominated conditions, the Workgroup has developed a standardized approach to evaluation of harms and relevant gaps in the evidence. Types of harms include the physical burden to infants; psychosocial and logistic burdens to families from screening or diagnostic evaluation; increased risk of medical treatment for infants diagnosed earlier than children with clinical presentation; delayed diagnosis from false negative results; psychosocial harm from false positive results; uncertainty of clinical diagnosis, age of onset or clinical spectrum; and disparities in access to diagnosis or therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Estimating the numbers of children at risk, the magnitude, timing and likelihood of harms will be integrated into Workgroup reports to the Advisory Committee

Decision-making process for conditions nominated to the recommended uniform screening panel: statement of the US Department of Health and Human Services Secretary\u27s Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children

PURPOSE: The US Secretary of Health and Human Services provides guidance to state newborn screening programs about which conditions should be included in screening (i.e., the Recommended Uniform Screening Panel ). This guidance is informed by evidence-based recommendations from the Secretary\u27s Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children. This report describes the Advisory Committee\u27s revised decision-making process for considering conditions nominated to the panel. METHODS: An expert panel meeting was held in April 2012 to revise the decision matrix, which helps to guide the recommendation process. In January 2013, the Advisory Committee voted to adopt the revised decision matrix. RESULTS: The revised decision matrix clarifies the approach to rating magnitude and certainty of the net benefit of screening to the population of screened newborns for nominated conditions, and now includes the consideration of the capability of state newborn screening programs for population-wide implementation by evaluating the feasibility and readiness of states to adopt screening for nominated conditions. CONCLUSION: The revised decision matrix will bring increased quality, transparency, and consistency to the process of modifying the recommended uniform screening panel and will now allow formal evaluation of the challenges that state newborn screening programs face in adopting screening for new conditions

Newborn screening timeliness quality improvement initiative: Impact of national recommendations and data repository.

BackgroundNewborn screening (NBS) aims to achieve early identification and treatment of affected infants prior to onset of symptoms. The timely completion of each step (i.e., specimen collection, transport, testing, result reporting), is critical for early diagnosis. Goals developed by the Secretary of Health and Human Services' Advisory Committee on Heritable Disorders in Newborns and Children (ACHDNC) for NBS timeliness were adopted (time-critical results reported by five days of life, and non-time-critical results reported by day seven), and implemented into a multi-year quality improvement initiative (NewSTEPS 360) aimed to decrease the time to result reporting and intervention.MethodsThe NBS system from specimen collection through reporting of results was assessed (bloodspot specimen collection, specimen shipping, sample testing, and result reporting). Annual data from 25 participating NBS programs were analyzed; the medians (and interquartile range, IQR) of state-specific percent of specimens that met the goal are presented.ResultsThe percent of specimens collected before 48 hours of life increased from 95% (88-97%) in 2016 to 97% (IQR 92-98%) in 2018 for the 25 states, with 20 (80%) of programs collecting more than 90% of the specimens within 48 hours of birth. Approximately 41% (IQR 29-57%) of specimens were transported within one day of collection. Time-critical result reporting in the first five days of life improved from 49% (IQR 26-74%) in 2016 to 64% (42%-71%) in 2018, and for non-time critical results from 64% (IQR 58%-78%) in 2016 to 81% (IQR 68-91%) in 2018. Laboratories open seven days a week in 2018 reported 95% of time-critical results within five days, compared to those open six days (62%), and five days (45%).ConclusionNBS programs that participated in NewSTEPs 360 made great strides in improving timeliness; however, ongoing quality improvement efforts are needed in order to ensure all infants receive a timely diagnosis