Research Article

The Effects of Type of Fitting, Technology and User Experience on Satisfaction with Hearing Aid Assessed by Persian Version of the MarkeTrak Survey


Background and Aim: Satisfaction with hearing aids is very important for continued use of the device and improving hearing status and quality of lives of people with hearing loss. MarkeTrak survey has been used for many years to track factors influencing satisfaction with hearing aids. This study aimed to make a valid and reliable Persian version of the MarkeTrak survey to measure the effects of type of fitting, experience and technology on hearing aid satisfaction.
Methods: After confirmation of validity and reliability of the Persian MarkeTrak, 71 people participate in the study. The effects of bilateral versus unilateral hearing aids (type of fitting), experience and wireless versus non-wireless technology were tested.
Results: Bilateral hearing aid users has significantly higher satisfaction rate than unilateral users (65.6±7.2 versus 59.9±17.7). The effects of experience with using hearing aids and type of technology did not reach statistical significance.
Conclusion: Higher satisfaction with bilateral hearing aids might result from better sound quality in diverse listening conditions, spatial hearing and directionality with two ears rather than one ear.

[1] Clark WW, Ohlemiller KK. Pathology of hearing: pathology of the middle ear and noise-induce hearing loss. In: Clark WW, Ohlemiller KK, editors. Anatomy and Physiology of Hearing for Audiologists. 1st ed. Clifton Park, USA: Thomson Delmar Learning; 2008. p. 312-40.
[2] Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part II. Feedback and occlusion effect reduction strategies, laser shell manufacturing processes, and other signal processing technologies. Trends Amplif. 2004;8(4):125-64. [DOI:10.1177/108471380400800402]
[3] Dillon H. Hearing Aids. 2nd ed. Thieme: New York; 2012.
[4] Cox RM, Alexander GC. Measuring Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life: the SADL scale. Ear Hear. 1999;20(4):306-20. [DOI:10.1097/00003446-199908000-00004]
[5] Cox RM, Alexander GC. Validation of the SADL questionnaire. Ear Hear. 2001;22(2):151-60. [DOI:10.1097/00003446-200104000-00008]
[6] Garstecki DC, Erler SF. Hearing loss, control, and demographic factors influencing hearing aid use among older adults. J Speech Lang Hear Res. 1998;41(3):527-37. [DOI:10.1044/jslhr.4103.527]
[7] Jerram JC, Purdy SC. Technology, expectations, and adjustment to hearing loss: predictors of hearing aid outcome. J Am Acad Audiol. 2001;12(2):64-79. [DOI:10.1055/s-0042-1745582]
[8] Kochkin S. Customer satisfaction and subjective benefit with high performance hearing aids. Hear Rev. 1996;3(12):16-26.
[9] Kochkin S. MarkeTrak V: Consumer satisfaction revisited. Hear J. 2000;53(1):38, 40, 42, 45-46, 50, 52, 55. [DOI:10.1097/00025572-200001000-00005]
[10] Kochkin S, Rogin CM. Quantifying the Obvious: The Impact of Hearing Instruments on Quality of Life. Hear Rev. 2000;7(1):6,8,10,12,16,18,22,24,26,30,32,34.
[11] World Health Organization. Deafness and hearing loss. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2017. Available from:
[12] Bentler RA, Niebuhr DP, Getta JP, Anderson CV. Longitudinal study of hearing aid effectiveness. II: Subjective measures. J Speech Hear Res. 1993;36(4):820-31. [DOI:10.1044/jshr.3604.820]
[13] Kimberley BP, Dymond R, Gamer A. Bilateral digital hearing aids for binaural hearing. Ear Nose Throat J. 1994;73(3):176-9. [DOI:10.1177/014556139407300311]
[14] Chung K. Challenges and recent developments in hearing aids. Part I. Speech understanding in noise, microphone technologies and noise reduction algorithms. Trends Amplif. 2004;8(3):83-124. [DOI:10.1177/108471380400800302]
[15] Bille M, Jensen AM, Kjaerbøl E, Vesterager V, Sibelle P, Nielsen H. Clinical study of a digital vs an analogue hearing aid. Scand Audiol. 1999;28(2):127-35. [DOI:10.1080/010503999424851]
[16] Hosford-Dunn H, Halpern J. Clinical application of the SADL scale in private practice II: predictive validity of fitting variables. Satisfaction with Amplification in Daily Life. J Am Acad Audiol. 2001;12(1):15-36. [DOI:10.1055/s-0041-1741116]
[17] Humes LE, Wilson DL, Barlow NN, Garner CB, Amos N. Longitudinal changes in hearing aid satisfaction and usage in the elderly over a period of one or two years after hearing aid delivery. Ear Hear. 2002;23(5):428-38. [DOI:10.1097/00003446-200210000-00005]
[18] Kim GY, Cho YS, Byun HM, Seol HY, Lim J, Park JG, et al. Factors Influencing Hearing Aid Satisfaction in South Korea. Yonsei Med J. 2022;63(6):570-7. [DOI:10.3349/ymj.2022.63.6.570]
[19] Köjbler S, Rosenhall U, Hansson H. Bilateral hearing aids--effects and consequences from a user perspective. Scand Audiol. 2001;30(4):223-35. [DOI:10.1080/01050390152704742]
[20] Kricos PB, Lesner SA, Sandridge SA. Expectations of older adults regarding the use of hearing aids. J Am Acad Audiol. 1991;2(3):129-33.
[21] Picou EM. MarkeTrak 10 (MT10) Survey Results Demonstrate High Satisfaction with and Benefits from Hearing Aids. Semin Hear. 2020;41(1):21-36. [DOI:10.1055/s-0040-1701243]
IssueVol 32 No 3 (2023) QRcode
SectionResearch Article(s)
Persian MarkeTrak bilateral hearing aids wireless experience satisfaction

Rights and permissions
Creative Commons License This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License.
How to Cite
Mohammadian S, Kamali M, Maarefvand M, Mobaraki H. The Effects of Type of Fitting, Technology and User Experience on Satisfaction with Hearing Aid Assessed by Persian Version of the MarkeTrak Survey. Aud Vestib Res. 2023;32(3):218-223.