OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of the patients at 1-year post cochlear implantation emphasized on audiological outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Retrospective study of hearing response follow in three, six, and 12 months of 143 ears undergoing cochlear implantation between 1995 and 2009. Only 77 ears were found to have the completed data for analysis. Deaf patients were categorized into five groups in which they were operated by four different cochlear implant devices. The two parameters used to evaluate the outcomes included the aided response (AR), assessing the hearing threshold of cochlear implant user; and the Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) which assess their auditory receptive abilities. RESULTS: Demographic data showed male:female ratio was 4:3. Age ranged from 2 to 68 years. Although the aided hearing threshold among five groups of deafness showed improvement without statistical difference, the auditory ability showed significance higher score in post-lingual than pre-lingual deaf patients (p < 0.05). Patients with aural communication prior to surgery also showed higher auditory ability than those without aural communication (p < 0.05). The outcomes of CAP were analyzed among patients operated with different cochlear implant devices. Users with Pulsar CI 100 Opus 2, HiRes 90K Auria, and HiRes 90 K Harmony showed better auditory ability than with Combi 40+ Tempo+. Both mean scores of AR and CAP were higher at six and 12 months than at three months. At 12 months the scores were higher than at six months (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implant surgery resulted in good hearing, however the improvement of speech understanding need more time to practice. Patients using cochlear implant at 12 months showed more improvement of hearing and performance than those using for less than 12 months.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the outcomes of the patients at 1-year post cochlear implantation emphasized on audiological outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Retrospective study of hearing response follow in three, six, and 12 months of 143 ears undergoing cochlear implantation between 1995 and 2009. Only 77 ears were found to have the completed data for analysis. Deaf patients were categorized into five groups in which they were operated by four different cochlear implant devices. The two parameters used to evaluate the outcomes included the aided response (AR), assessing the hearing threshold of cochlear implant user; and the Categories of Auditory Performance (CAP) which assess their auditory receptive abilities. RESULTS: Demographic data showed male:female ratio was 4:3. Age ranged from 2 to 68 years. Although the aided hearing threshold among five groups of deafness showed improvement without statistical difference, the auditory ability showed significance higher score in post-lingual than pre-lingual deaf patients (p < 0.05). Patients with aural communication prior to surgery also showed higher auditory ability than those without aural communication (p < 0.05). The outcomes of CAP were analyzed among patients operated with different cochlear implant devices. Users with Pulsar CI 100 Opus 2, HiRes 90K Auria, and HiRes 90 K Harmony showed better auditory ability than with Combi 40+ Tempo+. Both mean scores of AR and CAP were higher at six and 12 months than at three months. At 12 months the scores were higher than at six months (p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Cochlear implant surgery resulted in good hearing, however the improvement of speech understanding need more time to practice. Patients using cochlear implant at 12 months showed more improvement of hearing and performance than those using for less than 12 months.