Table 4

Hearing threshold levels of cases and controls in HCP* and the odds of being an AN case

Hearing in better earAN cases in HCP (N=49)Controls in HCP (N=147)
Mean (SD)Mean (SD)OR (95% CI)p Value
0.5 kHz6.3 (6.2)7.6 (6.3)0.97 (0.91 to 1.02)0.2280
1 kHz8.4 (11.7)7.1 (6.5)1.02 (0.98 to 1.06)0.3403
2 kHz10.4 (13.3)9.3 (11.2)1.01 (0.98 to 1.04)0.5733
3 kHz20.2 (16.9)19.9 (18.7)1.00 (0.98 to 1.02)0.9183
4 kHz25.9 (19.8)26.7 (21.8)1.00 (0.98 to 1.01)0.8229
6 kHz26.1 (19.7)29.7 (20.1)0.99 (0.97 to 1.01)0.2812
Avg 2,3,4 kHz18.8 (14.5)18.6 (15.7)1.00 (0.98 to 1.02)0.9354
Avg 3,4,6 kHz24.1 (17.2)25.4 (18.9)1.00 (0.98 to 1.01)0.6570
Avg 0.5, 1,2,3 kHz11.3 (10.1)10.9 (8.8)1.00 (0.97 to 1.04)0.8116
  • *Hearing threshold levels were compared using audiograms taken 10 years prior to the case AN diagnosis. Thus, to be included in this subanalysis, HCP participants had to have an audiogram record at that time.

  • For each case there were four controls matched on date of birth, year of hire, employee type and sex.

  • AN, acoustic neuroma; Avg, average; HCP, hearing conservation programme