Objectives: This study aimed to compare patient perspectives and experiences between per-meatal and post-aural tympanoplasty techniques, focusing on scar perception, postoperative symptoms, return to work, and quality of life (QOL). Design: Retrospective comparative study. Setting: Secondary care hospital. Participants: Fifty-four patients who underwent tympanoplasty via either per-meatal or post-aural methods. Main Outcome Measures: Patient-reported scar perception, postoperative symptoms and quality of life reported using validated patient reported outcome measure- The Chronic Otitis Media Benefit Inventory (COMBI) score, patient reported return time off work. Results: Scar perception was favourable in both groups. Most patients in the post-aural group (96%) were content with their scar, while 83% of the per-meatal group patients were not bothered by the possibility of a scar behind the ear. Long term postoperative symptoms, return to work, and quality of life (QOL) measures were comparable between the two groups. The Chronic Otitis Media Benefit Inventory (COMBI) scores showed no statistically significant difference between the two surgical techniques. Conclusion: Patient experiences and outcomes were similar between per-meatal and post-aural tympanoplasty techniques. Clinicians should consider individual patient factors and expectations when choosing a surgical approach.