Table 1 Comparison between the two studied groups according to demographic data and history
Group A(n = 11) | Group B(n = 10) | Test of significance | P value | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No. | % | No. | % | |||
Sex | ||||||
Male | 3 | 27.3 | 2 | 20.0 | χ2 = 0.153 | FEp = 1.000 |
Female | 8 | 72.7 | 8 | 80.0 | ||
Age pre-intervention (years) | ||||||
Mean ± SD | 5.11 ± 0.94 | 4.94 ± 0.59 | t = 0.473 | 0.642 | ||
Age of diagnosis of HI (years) | ||||||
Mean ± SD | 1.63 ± 1.24 | 1.28 ± 0.89 | t = 0.743 | 0.466 | ||
Timing of hearing loss | ||||||
Pre-lingual | 10 | 90.9 | 9 | 90.0 | χ2 = 0.005 | FEp = 1.000 |
Peri-lingual | 1 | 9.1 | 1 | 10.0 | ||
Degree of SNHL | ||||||
Bilateral profound | 9 | 81.8 | 10 | 100.0 | χ2 = 1.881 | MCp = 1.000 |
Bilateral severe | 1 | 9.1 | 0 | 0.0 | ||
Severe-profound | 1 | 9.1 | 0 | 0.0 | ||
HA/CI | ||||||
CI | 8 | 72.7 | 9 | 90.0 | χ2 = 1.014 | FEp = 0.586 |
HA | 3 | 27.3 | 1 | 10.0 | ||
Hearing age (years) | ||||||
Mean ± SD | 1.75 ± 1.21 | 1.51 ± 1.28 | t = 0.444 | 0.662 | ||
Previous rehabilitation | ||||||
No | 1 | 9.1 | 1 | 10.0 | χ2 = 0.005 | FEp = 1.000 |
Yes | 10 | 90.9 | 9 | 90.0 | ||