ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article

Risk Factors for Severe and Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Auditory Performance in Children After Cochlear Implant Surgery at Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, San Borja, Lima, 2021–2024

[version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]
PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2026
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS AWAITING PEER REVIEW

Abstract

Background

Sensorineural hearing loss in children, when associated with specific risk factors, can negatively affect language development, which in turn impacts their quality of life as well as their family and social environment.

Objective

To determine the association between risk factors for severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss and auditory performance in post–cochlear implant patients at Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, San Borja, during the period from 2021 to 2024.

Methods

An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted. Data collection was performed through a review of medical records; information was obtained from children treated between 2021 and 2024, including sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of post–cochlear implant patients. Auditory performance was assessed using the PEACH test.

Results

Medical records from 100 children who underwent cochlear implant surgery were reviewed. Preterm children showed poorer auditory performance (52.8%) compared with those born at term (70.5%). Children with low birth weight recorded a PEACH score of 51.4%, whereas those with normal birth weight reached higher values (71.8%). Additionally, children implanted before their first year of life presented a lower rate of suboptimal performance (40%), while those implanted after the age of three reached 56.5% performance. Analysis of risk factors associated with auditory outcomes revealed that prematurity, low birth weight, severe asphyxia, and hydrocephalus were significantly associated with poorer auditory performance.

Conclusions

There is a significant association between risk factors and reduced auditory performance in children with sensorineural hearing loss who underwent cochlear implant surgery, particularly among those born prematurely, with low birth weight, severe asphyxia, or hydrocephalus.

Keywords

Risk Factors; Auditory Performance; Cochlear Implant; Auditory Therapy; Children.

Introduction

The World Health Organization estimates that approximately 430 million people worldwide experience some degree of disabling hearing loss requiring rehabilitation.1 Among the genetically based risk factors are hereditary conditions such as Usher and Waardenburg syndromes, as well as neurofibromatosis type 2. Prenatal factors are also recognized—including infections such as rubella, cytomegalovirus, and toxoplasmosis—along with perinatal conditions such as prematurity and hypoxia, which may cause injury to the auditory nerve, leading to severe or profound hearing loss and negatively impacting language development.25 It is projected that by the year 2050, more than 700 million people will be living with some form of hearing loss, highlighting the growing magnitude of this global health problem.6,7

In the pediatric population, it is reported that between 1 and 3 per 1,000 newborns present with severe-to-profound sensorineural hearing loss; this number may increase to as many as 8 per 1,000 among neonates who required intensive care, given their increased exposure to risk factors during NICU admission.8,9 Childhood hearing loss represents a major concern due to its impact on speech and language development, which can result in significant deterioration of cognitive, social, and emotional development if not detected and treated in a timely manner.1012

Cochlear implantation has proven to be an effective intervention for restoring auditory function in cases of severe or profound hearing loss, allowing for the progressive development of auditory and verbal skills through auditory rehabilitation.1315 However, functional outcomes may vary depending on the presence of associated risk factors, making it essential to evaluate how these conditions influence auditory performance following surgery. Despite the relevance of this topic, no studies have been identified in Peru that examine the relationship between risk factors and auditory performance in pediatric patients undergoing cochlear implantation. In this context, the need arises to address the following question: How do risk factors influence auditory performance after cochlear implantation in children?

The objective of the present study was to determine the association between risk factors and auditory performance among cochlear implant recipients at Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, San Borja during the period 2021–2024.

Methods

Study design

An analytical cross-sectional study was conducted between 2021 and 2024 at the Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño–San Borja, including 100 postoperative cochlear implant recipients diagnosed with severe-to-profound bilateral sensorineural hearing loss. Primary data were obtained using the validated Parents’ Evaluation of Aural/Oral Performance of Children (PEACH) scale, and secondary data were extracted from electronic medical records.16 The sample size was calculated assuming a finite population of eligible patients and a 95% confidence level.17

To reduce selection and information bias, standardized procedures were used for data abstraction, and two independent researchers cross-verified extracted information. Patients with conductive or mixed hearing loss, incomplete clinical documentation, or whose caregivers declined participation were excluded.

Survey design

A structured data extraction form was developed to retrieve demographic, perinatal, and clinical variables from the medical records. The PEACH scale—developed and validated by Teresa Ching and Mandy Hill—is publicly available at: https://outcomes.nal.gov.au/peach/ and consists of 13 items that assess auditory performance in quiet, noisy environments, and overall functioning.18 Scores were converted into percentages for each domain (quiet/vowels, noise/consonants, and total performance) and categorized as high (≥75%), medium, or low performance.

Because the PEACH is a previously validated instrument, no modifications or translations were applied. Parents were interviewed by trained audiology staff following a detailed standardized protocol to reduce interviewer variability. Clarification prompts were scripted to minimize subjective interpretation. The full PEACH questionnaire used in this study is included as Extended Data to ensure reproducibility.

Data analysis

Data were entered using a double-entry system in Microsoft Excel to ensure consistency, and discrepancies were resolved through manual inspection. All analyses were conducted using STATA version 19. Normality of continuous variables was assessed using the Shapiro–Wilk test. Due to non-normal distribution of PEACH scores, group comparisons were performed with non-parametric tests: Mann–Whitney U test for two-group comparisons (e.g., age at implantation) and Kruskal–Wallis test for comparisons involving more than two groups (e.g., type of labor, geographical origin). Categorical variables were expressed as frequencies and percentages, and differences between groups were evaluated using Chi-square tests.

To identify factors associated with poor auditory performance (defined as PEACH <75%), crude prevalence ratios (RP) were obtained through bivariate analysis. Multivariable models were then fitted using logistic regression and Poisson regression with robust variance (FAM-Poisson), the latter chosen to avoid overestimation of associations in outcomes with high prevalence. Adjusted prevalence ratios (RPA) were calculated controlling for sex, geographical origin, and age at implantation. Statistical significance was set at p < 0.05, and 95% confidence intervals were reported. Sensitivity analyses were performed by reclassifying borderline PEACH scores to evaluate the robustness of the associations.

Ethical statement

This study was conducted for scientific purposes using anonymized secondary data obtained from medical records and standardized interviews with caregivers of children who underwent cochlear implantation between 2021 and 2024. All data were securely coded and stored to ensure strict confidentiality and compliance with ethical standards. The study adhered to the principles of beneficence, non-maleficence, autonomy, and justice, in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki.19

The research protocol was reviewed and approved by the Comité Institucional de Ética en Investigación del Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño – San Borja, located at Av. Agustín de la Rosa Toro N.° 1399, Urb. Jacaranda II, San Borja, Lima, Perú (Tel. 2300600, Anexo 4012). Ethical approval was granted on February 10, 2025, under Approval Certificate No. 011-2025, signed by Dra. Emiliana Rizo-Patrón Terrero, President of the Institutional Research Ethics Committee. No additional approval from independent review boards was required.

Written informed consent was obtained from all caregivers prior to data collection. This study was not pre-registered in any public research protocol registry, as national regulations do not mandate registration for observational studies involving anonymized secondary data.

Results

In the analysis of postoperative cochlear implant patients treated at the National Institute of Child Health–San Borja between 2021 and 2024, PEACH test scores varied according to perinatal characteristics and age at the time of assessment in Table 1. When comparing mode of labor, children born by vaginal labor achieved an average PEACH total score of 68.2 ± 22.1, with performances of 70.5% in the vowel section and 65.8% in the consonant section. In contrast, those born by cesarean section showed slightly lower values, with a mean PEACH total score of 62.4 ± 24.8, 64.1% for vowels, and 60.7% for consonants. Although the mean values were higher in the vaginal labor group, these differences did not reach statistical significance (p = 0.08 for the total score and p = 0.12 for sections A and B) in Table 1.

Table 1. Auditory performance (PEACH) according to mode of labor and age at implantation.

GroupPEACH total (Mean ± SD)PEACH A% (Vowels)PEACH B% (Consonants) p-value (Kruskal–Wallis)
Vaginal Labor (n = 60)68.2 ± 22.170.5 ± 18.365.8 ± 20.70.08
Cesarean Section (n = 40)62.4 ± 24.864.1 ± 21.260.7 ± 23.10.12
Age ≤3 years (n = 55)72.6 ± 19.4*74.2 ± 16.8*71.0 ± 18.1*0.04*
Age >3 years (n = 45)58.3 ± 25.760.1 ± 22.356.5 ± 24.9

* Better performance in children implanted at ≤3 years (p < 0.05).

With respect to age, more marked differences were observed. Children assessed before the age of three demonstrated significantly higher performance, with a PEACH total score of 72.6 ± 19.4, 74.2% for vowels, and 71.0% for consonants. Conversely, those older than three years obtained an average PEACH total score of 58.3 ± 25.7, with 60.1% for vowels and 56.5% for consonants. Comparison between both groups revealed statistically significant differences (p = 0.04), indicating that younger age at assessment is associated with better auditory performance following cochlear implantation in Table 1.

The analysis showed that prematurity was associated with a 3.1-fold higher crude risk (95% CI: 1.4–6.8) compared with term births, and this association persisted in the adjusted model, yielding an OR of 2.8 (95% CI: 1.2–6.5; p = 0.01). Likewise, low birth weight was an important risk factor, with a crude OR of 3.8 (95% CI: 1.7–8.5) and an adjusted OR of 3.5 (95% CI: 1.5–8.1), confirming a statistically significant association (p = 0.003). Severe birth asphyxia was also linked to a greater risk of impaired auditory performance, with a crude OR of 3.6 (95% CI: 1.3–9.8) and an adjusted OR of 3.2 (95% CI: 1.1–9.1; p = 0.03). Similarly, meningitis represented the most impactful factor, with a crude OR of 5.0 (95% CI: 1.4–17.9) and an adjusted OR of 4.7 (95% CI: 1.3–17.0), indicating a markedly increased risk and strong statistical significance (p = 0.02) in Table 2.

Table 2. Association between neonatal complications and PEACH.

ComplicationCrude OR (95% CI)Adjusted OR (95% CI)* p-value
Prematurity3.1 (1.4–6.8)2.8 (1.2–6.5)0.01*
Low birth weight3.8 (1.7–8.5)3.5 (1.5–8.1)0.003*
Severe asphyxia3.6 (1.3–9.8)3.2 (1.1–9.1)0.03*
Meningitis5.0 (1.4–17.9)4.7 (1.3–17.0)0.02*

* Adjusted for age, sex, and place of origin. Dependent variable: Low PEACH (<75%).

Patients from Metropolitan Lima achieved a median score of 80, with an interquartile range (IQR) of 65 to 90, representing the group with the highest outcomes. In contrast, patients from Provincial Lima had a median of 65 [50–75], whereas those from coastal provinces reached a median of 70 [55–85]. Meanwhile, patients from the central region showed a median of 60 [40–75], and those from the southern region recorded the lowest values, with a median of 55 [30–70]. Statistical comparison using the Kruskal–Wallis test yielded a p-value of 0.02, indicating that these differences were statistically significant in Table 3.

Table 3. Differences in PEACH scores according to geographic origin.

Geographic originnTotal PEACH (Median [IQR]) p-value (Kruskal–Wallis)
Metropolitan Lima4580 [65–90]0.02*
Lima Provinces1565 [50–75]
Coastal Provinces2070 [55–85]
Central Provinces1560 [40–75]
Southern Provinces555 [30–70]

* Significant differences were found (p < 0.05), with better performance observed in Metropolitan Lima.

The findings showed that a history of exposure to ototoxic medications was present in 26% of children with low PEACH scores, compared with only 8% of those with high scores; this difference was statistically significant (p = 0.007). Likewise, an extended stay in the Intensive Care Unit (>48 hours) had a negative impact on auditory performance: 45% of children with low PEACH scores experienced this condition, whereas it was observed in 22% of those with high scores, representing a significant difference (p = 0.01). Similarly, the requirement for mechanical ventilation for more than five days was also associated with poorer auditory performance; 31% of children with low PEACH scores were exposed to this factor compared with 12% of those with high scores, demonstrating a statistically significant difference (p = 0.02) in Table 4.

Table 4. Ototoxic agents and ICU stay in relation to PEACH scores.

VariableHigh PEACH (n = 58)Low PEACH (n = 42) p-value
Use of ototoxic agents8%26%0.007* (Chi2)
ICU stay >48 h22%45%0.01* (Chi2)
Mechanical ventilation >5 days12%31%0.02* (Chi2)

* Higher prevalence of low PEACH scores among patients exposed to these factors.

In an analysis of 100 postoperative cochlear implant recipients treated at the National Institute of Child Health–San Borja during 2021–2024, the mean age at implantation was 4.2 ± 3.1 years, with no statistically significant difference between the high auditory performance group (PEACH ≥75%) and the low performance group (PEACH <75%)—3.8 ± 2.5 vs. 4.7 ± 3.8 years, respectively (p = 0.15). Regarding sex, 52% of patients were male, with similar distribution across groups (55% in the high PEACH group vs. 48% in the low PEACH group; p = 0.47). Likewise, place of residence was not associated with performance: 45% resided in Metropolitan Lima (50% among high PEACH vs. 38% among low PEACH; p = 0.22) in Table 5.

Table 5. Risk factors associated with auditory performance (PEACH) in postoperative cochlear implant recipients (2015–2024).

VariableTotal (n = 100)High PEACH (≥75%) (n = 58)Low PEACH (<75%) (n = 42) p value
Age at implantation (years)4.2 ± 3.13.8 ± 2.54.7 ± 3.80.15 (MW)
Sex (Male)52%55%48%0.47 (χ2)
Residence (Metropolitan Lima)45%50%38%0.22 (χ2)
Prematurity (<37 weeks)38%24%57%0.001*2)
Low birth weight32%19%48%0.003*2)
Severe perinatal asphyxia18%10%29%0.02*2)
Meningitis12%5%21%0.01*2)

* Statistically significant (p < 0.05).

Analysis of perinatal conditions and clinical history identified significant associations. Prematurity (<37 weeks) was present in 38% of the sample and was more frequent in the low PEACH group (57%) than in the high PEACH group (24%), a statistically significant difference (p = 0.001). Similarly, low birth weight was recorded in 32% of patients and was more common among those with low PEACH (48%) compared with those with high PEACH (19%; p = 0.003). Severe perinatal asphyxia was reported in 18% overall, with a predominance in the low PEACH group (29% vs. 10%; p = 0.02). Finally, meningitis was a antecedent in 12% of children and was more prevalent among those with low PEACH (21%) than among those with high PEACH (5%; p = 0.01) in Table 5.

The results show that prematurity (<37 weeks) was present in 63.2% of cases with low auditory performance, and was associated with a significantly increased crude risk (PR: 2.8; 95% CI: 1.6–4.9; p < 0.001). In multivariate analysis this factor remained an independent predictor, with an adjusted risk of 2.5 (95% CI: 1.4–4.4) in the logistic model and 2.6 (95% CI: 1.5–4.5) in the Poisson model with robust variance in Table 6.

Table 6. Factors associated with auditory performance (PEACH) — Bivariate and multivariate analysis.

VariablePEACH low (<75%) n (%)Bivariate PR (95% CI) p-value Multivariate (Logistic) aPR (95% CI) Multivariate (Poisson, robust) aPR (95% CI)
Premature (<37 weeks)24/38 (63.2%)2.8 (1.6–4.9)<0.0012.5 (1.4–4.4)*2.6 (1.5–4.5)*
Low birth weight20/32 (62.5%)2.6 (1.5–4.5)0.0012.3 (1.3–4.1)*2.4 (1.4–4.2)*
Severe perinatal asphyxia11/18 (61.1%)2.4 (1.2–4.8)0.012.1 (1.0–4.3)2.2 (1.1–4.5)*
Meningitis9/12 (75.0%)3.5 (1.6–7.6)0.0023.1 (1.4–6.9)*3.2 (1.5–7.0)*
Age > 3 years at implantation28/45 (62.2%)1.8 (1.1–3.0)0.021.6 (0.9–2.8)1.7 (1.0–2.9)

* Models adjusted for sex, place of origin and age at implantation. Poisson (robust variance): Poisson model with robust variance to avoid overestimation in frequent binary outcomes.

Similarly, low birth weight was associated with poorer performance in 62.5% of patients, yielding a crude risk of 2.6 (95% CI: 1.5–4.5; p = 0.001). This association remained significant after adjustment in both the logistic model (aPR: 2.3; 95% CI: 1.3–4.1) and the Poisson model (aPR: 2.4; 95% CI: 1.4–4.2) in Table 6.

Severe perinatal asphyxia was observed in 61.1% of patients with low PEACH scores, with a crude risk of 2.4 (95% CI: 1.2–4.8; p = 0.01). In adjusted analysis this factor showed borderline significance (aPR: 2.1; 95% CI: 1.0–4.3 in the logistic model; aPR: 2.2; 95% CI: 1.1–4.5 in the Poisson model) in Table 6.

Meningitis had the largest impact: 75.0% of affected patients had low auditory performance, with a crude risk of 3.5 (95% CI: 1.6–7.6; p = 0.002) and a similarly significant adjusted risk in both models (logistic: aPR: 3.1; 95% CI: 1.4–6.9; Poisson: aPR: 3.2; 95% CI: 1.5–7.0) in Table 6.

Finally, age greater than 3 years at implantation was associated in the bivariate analysis (PR: 1.8; 95% CI: 1.1–3.0; p = 0.02), but lost statistical significance in multivariate analysis, remaining only as a trend toward higher risk (logistic: aPR: 1.6; 95% CI: 0.9–2.8; Poisson: aPR: 1.7; 95% CI: 1.0–2.9) in Table 6.

Discussion

In this cohort of 100 postoperative cochlear implant recipients treated at the National Institute of Child Health–San Borja between 2021 and 2024, auditory performance as measured by the PEACH scale was significantly influenced by perinatal and early developmental factors. These findings are consistent with those reported by Díaz et al.,20 who highlighted the relevance of early-life complications on long-term auditory outcomes.

Prematurity and low birth weight were among the strongest predictors of reduced auditory performance. In the present study, 63.2% of premature children and 62.5% of those with low birth weight showed low PEACH scores, with adjusted prevalence ratios ranging from 2.3 to 2.6 across multivariate models. This suggests that preterm birth and intrauterine growth restriction can compromise auditory processing pathways through mechanisms such as delayed neurosensory maturation, chronic hypoxia, and myelination deficits—processes that are critical for effective auditory encoding and cortical integration. Similar findings were described by Boboshko, Savenko et al., and Aldè et al.,2123 who proposed that neonatal hypoxic–ischemic injury and immature neural synchronization contribute to the vulnerability of the auditory cortex in preterm infants.

Age at implantation also played a decisive role in auditory outcomes. Children implanted before the age of three demonstrated significantly higher PEACH scores (72.6 ± 19.4) compared with those implanted later (58.3 ± 25.7; p = 0.04). This agrees with the observations of Wahyu et al. and Culbertson et al.,24,25 who emphasized that earlier auditory stimulation through cochlear implantation promotes optimal neural plasticity and language acquisition. During the first three years of life, synaptic density and cortical mapping remain highly adaptable; therefore, earlier activation of the auditory pathway enhances the establishment of functional auditory–linguistic networks.

Among the clinical conditions analyzed, meningitis emerged as the most detrimental factor, with affected patients exhibiting a threefold higher adjusted risk of poor auditory performance (aPR = 3.1–3.2, p < 0.01). The pathophysiological mechanisms underlying this association are well recognized—post-meningitic cochlear ossification, spiral ganglion neuron loss, and central auditory sequelae can all limit the effectiveness of electrical stimulation.26 Our results parallel those reported by Singhal et al.,26 who demonstrated significantly lower speech perception and auditory comprehension among post-meningitic implant recipients. These findings underscore the importance of rapid surgical intervention following meningitis to prevent cochlear fibrosis and optimize postoperative outcomes.27

In addition, exposure to ototoxic agents and prolonged mechanical ventilation were significantly associated with lower PEACH scores (p < 0.01). Children with a history of ototoxic drug use had a threefold higher prevalence of poor auditory performance (26% vs. 8%), while prolonged ICU stay (>48 h) and mechanical ventilation (>5 days) were also linked to reduced auditory outcomes (45% and 31%, respectively, in the low PEACH group). These findings are consistent with the evidence presented by Naik et al. and other authors,20,28,29 who recommend systematic audiologic monitoring for patients exposed to aminoglycosides, loop diuretics, or prolonged hypoxic conditions during intensive care, given their potential to cause irreversible cochlear or neural damage.

Overall, the present findings indicate that auditory performance following cochlear implantation is determined not only by surgical and technological variables but also by early perinatal risk factors that influence auditory plasticity. Early diagnosis, timely intervention, and continuous auditory rehabilitation are therefore critical to maximizing post-implant outcomes. In line with Naik et al.,29 comprehensive management should include structured family counseling and long-term audiologic follow-up to strengthen auditory–linguistic development and social integration in affected children.

Conclusion

In this study, a significant association was found between several risk factors and poorer auditory performance in hearing-impaired children who underwent cochlear implantation. The most strongly associated factors were prematurity, low birth weight, severe perinatal asphyxia, and hydrocephalus, all of which were linked to less favorable auditory and language development outcomes following surgery.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2026
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Marin Marín D, Cordero Tito LK, Montañez Córdova LM et al. Risk Factors for Severe and Profound Sensorineural Hearing Loss and Auditory Performance in Children After Cochlear Implant Surgery at Instituto Nacional de Salud del Niño, San Borja, Lima, 2021–2024 [version 1; peer review: awaiting peer review]. F1000Research 2026, 15:159 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.173575.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status:
AWAITING PEER REVIEW
AWAITING PEER REVIEW
?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 31 Jan 2026
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.