What’s The Preferred Rechargeable Hearing Aid With Direct Streaming?

Combining new technologies together in a way which enhances user-benefit is an effective form of innovation. The Pure Charge&Go hearing aid follows this approach by integrating lithium-ion rechargeability and direct streaming in a receiver in the canal design. Despite the fact that lithium-ion modules are typically larger than disposable zinc-air batteries, the inductively charged lithium-ion technology allows a sealed design and the removal of space consuming components such as battery doors and charging contacts.

To test the appeal of Pure Charge&Go against leading competitor hearing aids, a study was conducted in the United States in April 2018, which was administered as an online survey. Participants were randomly selected and then screened for active smartphone use and hearing loss.  The final participant group consisted of one-hundred people aged 40-70, with ninety-percent of the participants aged 50-70. Three-quarters of the participants wore hearing aids, and the majority of these participants were experienced hearing aid wearers (77 percent). At the time of writing, iOS provided the only direct streaming solution which supported binaural streaming of phone calls and of audio media. The study consequently focused on comparing iOS compatible direct streaming technology, and therefore the participant group was filtered to obtain a relatively high share (80 percent) of iOS smartphone users.

The study consisted of three parts: part one compared rechargeable hearing aids capable of direct streaming. In part two, rechargeable devices with lithium-ion technology were compared, even if the devices did not support direct streaming. Part three compared all of the devices from parts one and two, and used photos showing the size and design of each hearing aid. This was considered relevant because size is an important consideration during the hearing aid selection process.

The first and second parts used published manufacturer claims to compare various performance characteristics of each hearing aid. For example, information on battery runtime, time to full charge, rechargeable battery lifetime, and if the hearing aid was compatible with standard zinc-air batteries were given. Where necessary, the runtime values were adjusted to reflect five hours of streaming (a runtime based on five hours of streaming was provided in the marketing materials for all products except one).

For parts one and two, data was obtained to calculate the Net Promoter Score (NPS) by asking participants to answer the following question: How high would you rate the likelihood that you would recommend this product to a close friend? on a scale from 1 (very low) to 10 (very high). Based on these data, the NPS was calculated according to a standard definition by subtracting the detractor scores (participants who rated the product with a score in the range 1 to 6) from the promoter score (participants who rated the product with a score of 9 or 10). Scores of 7 or 8 were excluded from the NPS calculation (Reichheld, F. 2006). In addition, the match of the hearing aid to participants’ needs was investigated by asking participants to rate the following question on a scale from 1 (not sufficient) to 10 (perfectly): How well would this product meet your overall needs during everyday life?

Part three of the study compared all of the devices from parts one and two (Pure Charge&Go and two rechargeable hearing aids with direct streaming, and Pure Charge&Go with a lithium-ion hearing aid without direct streaming), and used photos which displayed the size and design of each hearing aid, in conjunction with facts describing key functionalities. As for parts one and two, the NPS was calculated. On all photos, the brand and name markings were removed from the hearing aids and accessories. For parts one, two and three, the order of presentation of the products was randomized between participants.

When more than two hearing aids were compared, a repeated measures Anova was calculated using Greenhouse-Geisser corrections. To identify differences between individual hearing aids Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used. In part two where only two hearing aids were compared, a paired T-test was performed.

Pure Charge&Go was the preferred hearing aid in all parts of the study: a comparison of rechargeable hearing aids featuring direct streaming, a comparison of lithium-ion rechargeable hearing aids, and a comparison of all devices which included photos showing size and design. In all parts, Pure Charge&Go consistently obtained a positive Net Promoter Score (NPS), whereas two out of three of the competitor products failed to obtain a positive NPS. In the comparison of rechargeable devices featuring direct streaming, Pure Charge&Go offered the most positive match to wearers’ needs among the hearing aids compared. In part three, where product size and visual design was included in the comparison, Pure Charge&Go remained the preferred device amongst the majority of participants.

Reichheld, F. (2006). The Ultimate Question: Driving Good Profits and True Growth. Brighton, MA: Harvard Business Review Press.