METHODS: A total of 11 parents and 8 teachers of the 6-year old CI children participated and rated the children using the School Readiness Scale to Year One. Data from 207 6-year old NH children from five states in Malaysia were also collected using the same scale which has nine domains. Results from the NH children were categorized into the 25th and 75th percentile scores to be the reference cut-offs for below average (below the 25th percentile), average (25th to 75th percentile) and above average (above 75th percentile).

RESULTS: The school readiness skills of the CI children were lower than the NH group as rated by teachers especially in the civic and language and communication domains. Comparisons between parents' and teachers' ratings for 8 CI children indicated that teachers tended to rate the CI children's school readiness poorer than that of parents especially in the academic domain. Intra-class correlation analysis revealed poor inter-rater agreement.

MATERIALS AND METHODS: We retrospectively reviewed all postlingual and cross-over recipients of cochlear implants under the National Ministry of Heath CI Programme from 2009 to 2013. The outcomes measured were surgical complications and functional outcome. Surgical complications were divided into major and minor complications. Functional outcomes were measured using Categorical Auditory Performances (CAP) scale.

RESULTS: A total of 41 post-lingual and 15 cross-over patients were implanted between 2009 and 2013. The age of implantees ranged from 3.6 years to 63.2 years old. There were two major complications (3.6%), one is a case of electrode migration at three months post implantation, and six months post second implantation. Another was a case of device failure at about one-year post implantation. Both patients were reimplanted in the same ear. There was no minor complication. The CAP score for both groups (overall) showed significant improvement with 96.4% achieved CAP score of five and above at 24 months after implantation (p<0.001). The CAP score showed marked improvement at the first 6 months post implantation and continued to improve with time in both groups.

STUDY DESIGN: This was a cross sectional observational study.

METHODS: Two sets of questionnaires were given to 126 parents or primary caregivers of the implantees. The first set of questionnaire contained questions to assess the children's usage of CI, their types of education placement, and their modes of communication. The second set of questionnaire was the Parent's Evaluation Of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) to evaluate the children's auditory functionality.

RESULTS: Our study showed that among the implantees, 97.6% are still using their CI, 69.8% communicating orally, and 58.5% attending mainstream education. For implantees that use oral communication and attend mainstream education, their mean age of implantation is 38 months. This is significantly lower compared to the mean age of implantation of implantees that use non-oral communication and attend non-mainstream education. Simple logistic regression analysis shows age of implantation reliably predicts implantees (N = 126) would communicate using oral communication with odds ratio of 0.974, and also predict mainstream education (N = 118) with odds ratio of 0.967. The median score of PEACH rating scale is 87.5% in quiet, and this significantly correlates with an earlier age of implantation (r = -0.235 p = 0.048).