Thin Tube Mini-BTE Survey

Sergei Kochkin, Ph.D.

September 11, 2006

Introduction

• In CY 2006 according to HIA statistics BTE hearing aids have grown to 45% of fittings in the U.S.

• The resurgence of BTE fittings is felt to be caused by the wide scale availability of smaller BTE hearing aids with less conspicuous ear molds and one or more of the following features:– Thin almost invisible ear tubes– Open fit– Or receivers embedded in the ear canal at the end of the thin tube.– Creative form factors making the product look less like a hearing

aid.

• In this study, I will use the term “thin-tube” BTE as a general term for this product: open fit, RITE (receiver in the ear), PAC (post auricular canal), OTE (on-the-ear), etc.

Objectives

• Measure reasons for thin-tube BTE purchase.

• Does the product per se cause more people to seek a hearing solution?

Method

• Members of BHI physician referral development network asked to complete Internet survey on their last 2 customers fit with a thin-tube BTE hearing aid (August 31, 2006).

• 116 audiologists or hearing instrument specialists responded resulting in surveys on 232 customers.

Demographics

• Gender – 61% male– Same as MarkeTrak VII

• New User – 68%– Compared to MarkeTrak 39%

• Average age– New users – 60 (MarkeTrak = 69)– Experienced user – 65

Patient involvement in decision to purchase Thin Tube BTE

17

66

16

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

None Minor Major

Reasons for Fitting (Top 8)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Looks less like HA

HHP recommendation

Directional mics

Visibility

Better benefit

Better sound quality

Fit and comfort

Less occlusion

Definite Somewhat

Reasons for Fitting (Bottom 8)

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

More controls

Colors

More power

Customer recommendation

No ear impression

Responded to AD

Less returns

Instant fit

Definite Somewhat

Reasons for Fitting

• Concentrating on “Definite” reasons for fitting, the top issues would appear to be:– Less occlusion– Better fit and comfort– Better benefit– Better sound quality

• Areas of least importance in decision to fit:– More controls such as VC– Color– Greater power in smaller package– Customer recommendation

Customer Satisfaction Compared to traditional product

• Hearing health professionals feel strongly that their customers are more satisfied with this product than traditional product.– 55% significantly more satisfied– 36% more satisfied– 8% equal– 1 % less satisfied

Likelihood of purchasing hearing aid in absence of thin tube Mini-BTE

• 22% would not have purchased anything.

• Would have been fit instead with:– BTE (12%)– Mini-BTE (14%)– ITE (7%)– ITC/CIC (46%)

New User versus Experienced User

• New user more likely to be motivated to purchase based on:– Visibility (45% versus 25% definite reason); p<.02.– Looks less like a hearing aid (32% versus 17%

definite reason); p<.01.– Non-traditional color (10% versus 1% definite

reason); p<.02.

• And more likely to reject traditional product– 24% versus 17%; p<.05.

Does the thin tube BTE product result in more people seeking a hearing

solution?

• The evidence in favor of more people seeking a hearing solution due to the availability of the thin-tube BTE; – Lower age of new users by 9 years– Increased new user rate by 29% points– 1 in 5 consumers are reported to have

rejected all other hearing aid styles in the absence of the thin-tube BTE.

Conclusions

• The appeal of the product is primarily due to improvements in occlusion, sound quality, fit and comfort and perceptions of benefit.

• In MarkeTrak VIII we will use a nationally representative sample of hearing aid consumers to confirm that:– more people seek a hearing solution if a thin-tube

BTE is available.– that satisfaction increases with the use of this

product category.