Skip to main content
. 2023 May 11;44(6):1430–1436. doi: 10.1097/AUD.0000000000001382

TABLE 2.

Comparison of auditory and neuro-electrophysiological results between the affected side (with typewriter tinnitus) and unaffected side (without typewriter tinnitus) of all patients (n = 18)

Valuables Unaffected Side (n = 18) Affected Side (n = 18) p
PTA (median [IQR], dB HL) 15.6 (10.0–27.8) 16.3 (10.9–27.8) 0.815
ABR
 I wave latency (median [IQR], ms) 1.6 (1.6–1.7) 1.7 (1.6–1.7) 0.321
 III wave latency (mean ± SD, ms) 3.9 (3.8–4.1) 4.1 (4.0–4.3) 0.002 *
 V wave latency (median [IQR], ms) 5.7 (5.6–5.8) 5.9 (5.8–6.1) 0.030 *
 IPL I-III (median [IQR], ms) 2.3 (2.2–2.3) 2.4 (2.3–2.5) <0.001 *
 IPL III-V (mean ± SD, ms) 1.8 ± 0.1 1.8 ± 0.1 0.572
 IPL I-III ≥2.3 ms (n, %)
  No 14 (77.8) 0 (0.0) <0.001 *
  Yes 3 (16.7) 18 (100.0)
  Absent response 1 (5.5) 0 (0.0)
*

P < 0.05.

ABR, auditory brainstem response; IPL, interpeak latency; IQR, interquartile range; PTA, pure-tone audiometry; SD, standard deviation.