Not provided
| ID | Type | Description | Link |
|---|---|---|---|
| CCSTOH001689 | Other Identifier | Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&JCI) |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
The purpose of this study is to assess the wound healing efficacy (time to complete healing) of different adhesive bandages.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Label | Type | Description | Intervention Names |
|---|---|---|---|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage #1 | Active Comparator | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage #2 | Active Comparator | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed only on Days 3, 5, 7, 9, 11, 13, 15, and 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage #1 | Active Comparator | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage #2 | Experimental | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
| Name | Type | Description | Arm Group Labels | Other Names |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage #1 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Time to Complete Wound Healing | Time to complete wound healing: time(in days) elapsed from time of wound creation to 12 PM of day (up to Day 16) on which composite healing score(CHS) first meets complete healing criterion of being at least a score of 8 (threshold for complete healing). CHS was calculated from clinical grading of wound healing parameters as general wound appearance (0 [Poor-New or fresh wound with epithelium layer missing, wound bed appears raw and possibly oozing] to 4 [Excellent-Fully healed, skin flush against surrounding skin, slight color mismatch may be present])+smoothness (0 [Rough, uneven wound]- 4 [complete smoothness, even wound])+epithelial confluence (0 [None]- 4 [91-100%full epithelial growth]) - erythema (0 [None]- 4 [Severe]) - edema (0 [None]- 4 [Severe]) - crusting/scabbing (0 [None]- 4 [90-100% crusting/scabbing]). CHS on 25-point scale (-12 [no healing] to +12 [towards healing]) is indicative of extent of wound healing and was calculated for each wound site at each evaluation day. | Up to Day 16 |
| Measure | Description | Time Frame |
|---|---|---|
| Change From Baseline in Trans-Epidermal Water Loss (TEWL) Measurements | Change from Baseline in TEWL was reported. TEWL is the passive transfer of water through stratum corneum and was measured for each wound site using Tewameter TM330T. TEWL is a non-invasive method to measure the integrity of stratum corneum barrier function. Tewameter probe measures the density gradient of the water evaporation from the skin indirectly by two pairs of sensors (temperature and relative humidity) inside a hollow cylinder. The probe was held in place on the skin for one measurement, for 40 sec, to ensure that a stable value has been established. The values of the last 10 sec are averaged as the actual measurement values. An increase in TEWL values shows damage to the skin barrier function. |
Not provided
Inclusion Criteria:
Exclusion Criteria:
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Name | Affiliation | Role |
|---|---|---|
| Lily Jiang, PhD | Thomas J. Stephens & Associates, Inc. | Principal Investigator |
| Facility | Status | City | State | ZIP | Country | Contacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Thomas J. Stephens | Richardson | Texas | 75081 | United States |
Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. has an agreement with the Yale Open Data Access (YODA) Project to serve as the independent review panel for evaluation of requests for clinical study reports and participant level data from investigators and physicians for scientific research that will advance medical knowledge and public health. Requests for access to the study data can be submitted through the YODA Project site at http://yoda.yale.edu.
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
All participants received all eight intervention at the same time on their forearms. At Screening (Visit 1; 3 to 7 days prior to Baseline), participants were provided with an auxiliary cleanser to use on their forearms and for all body cleansing in place of their regular body cleanser for the duration of the study. As planned, for all outcome measures, the results are reported for each bandage separately.
Not provided
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| FG000 | All Randomized Participants | All Participants with Fitzpatrick skin types II (burns easily; tans minimum)-III (burns moderately; tans gradually) with uniform skin color on forearms, minor wounds were created on forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist received all eight intervention at the same time on the wounds created on forearms. Each wound site was subjected to one of eight randomly-assigned treatments included in an adhesive bandage that were: 1) a marketed adhesive bandage, 2) a marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 1), 3) a non-marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 2), 4-7) four non-marketed adhesive bandages (IP#1, IP#2, IP#3, IP#4), and 8) no treatment (uncovered, negative control). Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandages were not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| Title | Milestones | Reasons Not Completed | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Study |
|
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
| Type | Includes Protocol | Includes SAP | Includes ICF | Document Label | Document Date | Document Uploaded Date | Document File Name |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Prot | Yes | No | No | Study Protocol | Aug 28, 2019 | Oct 16, 2020 |
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
Not provided
|
| Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage #3 | Experimental | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage #4 | Experimental | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage #5 | Experimental | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, bandage will be applied. This adhesive bandage will be changed daily from Day 1 through Day 16 and all wound sites will be uncovered from Day 16 to Day 28 for assessments. |
|
| No Treatment (Uncovered, Negative Control) | No Intervention | Minor wounds will be created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, no treatment will be applied as the wound will be kept uncovered as negative control. |
| Marketed Bandage #2 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Non-Marketed Bandage #1 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a non-marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Non-Marketed Bandage #2 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a non-marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Non-Marketed Adhesive Bandage #3 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a non-marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Non-Marketed Adhesive Bandage #4 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a non-marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Non-Marketed Adhesive Bandage #5 | Device | On the randomized wound site, a non-marketed adhesive bandage will be applied. |
|
| Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 |
| Change From Baseline in Clinical Grading of Wound Healing Parameter - Erythema | Change from baseline in Clinical grading of wound healing parameter (erythema) was evaluated on a scale of 0 (no erythema) to 4 (severe erythema). | Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 |
| Change From Baseline in Clinical Grading of Wound Healing Parameter - Edema | Change from baseline in Clinical grading of wound healing parameter (edema) was evaluated on a scale of 0 (no edema) to 4 (severe edema). | Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 |
| Change From Baseline in Composite Scar Score | Change from baseline in composite scar score was reported. It was calculated as the sum of the individual parameters on the Manchester Scar Scale (Color ranges 1 [perfect] to 4 [gross mismatch]), Finish ranges 1 [matte] to 2 [shiny], Contour ranges 1 [Flush with surrounding skin] to 4 [keloid], Distortion ranges 1 [none] to 4 [severe] and Texture ranges 1 [normal] to 4 [hard]). Composite Scar Scores range from 5 to 18, with 5 representing clinically best scars and 18 representing clinically worst scars. | Baseline and Day 28 |
| Change From Baseline in Painful Score With Arm Resting by Side | Change from baseline in painful score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 1) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for pain/soreness in resting position as score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| Change From Baseline in Painful Score With Arm in Normal Motion | Change from baseline in Painful Score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 3) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for pain/soreness in normal position as score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| Change From Baseline in Itchy Score | Change from baseline in itchy score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 5) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for itchiness as score from 0 (no itch) to 10 (severe itch). | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| Number of Participants With Pain Duration With Arm Resting by Side | Participants were asked to rate the pain as either brief, periodic, or constant in arm resting position with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire (question 2). Number of participants with pain duration (brief, periodic, or constant) with arm resting by side was reported. | Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| Number of Participants With Pain Duration With Arm in Normal Motion | Participants were asked to rate the pain as either brief, periodic, or constant in arm normal motion with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire (question 4). Number of participants with pain duration (brief, periodic, or constant) with arm in normal motion was reported. | Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| Treated |
|
| COMPLETED |
|
| NOT COMPLETED |
|
|
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description |
|---|---|---|
| BG000 | All Randomized Participants | All Participants with Fitzpatrick skin types II (burns easily; tans minimum)-III (burns moderately; tans gradually) with uniform skin color on forearms, minor wounds were created on forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist received all eight intervention at the same time on the wounds created on forearms. Each wound site was subjected to one of eight randomly-assigned treatments included in an adhesive bandage that were: 1) a marketed adhesive bandage, 2) a marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 1), 3) a non-marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 2), 4-7) four non-marketed adhesive bandages (IP#1, IP#2, IP#3, IP#4), and 8) no treatment (uncovered, negative control). Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandages were not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| Units | Counts |
|---|---|
| Participants |
|
| Title | Description | Population Description | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Denominator Units Selected | Denominators | Classes | ||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Age, Continuous | Mean | Standard Deviation | Years |
| |||||||||||||||||||||
| Sex: Female, Male | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Ethnicity (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Race (NIH/OMB) | Count of Participants | Participants |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||
| Fitzpatrick Skin Classification | The Fitzpatrick skin classification is based on the skin's unprotected response to the first 30-45 minutes of sun exposure after a winter season without sun exposure. The classification is on a scale from I to VI where I = always burns easily; never tans and VI =Never burns; deeply pigmented. | Count of Participants | Participants |
|
| Type | Title | Description | Population Description | Reporting Status | Anticipated Posting Date | Parameter Type | Dispersion Type | Unit of Measure | Calculate Percentage | Time Frame | Units Analyzed | Denominator Units Selected | Arm/Group Information | Denominators | Classes | Analyses | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Trans-Epidermal Water Loss (TEWL) Measurements | Change from Baseline in TEWL was reported. TEWL is the passive transfer of water through stratum corneum and was measured for each wound site using Tewameter TM330T. TEWL is a non-invasive method to measure the integrity of stratum corneum barrier function. Tewameter probe measures the density gradient of the water evaporation from the skin indirectly by two pairs of sensors (temperature and relative humidity) inside a hollow cylinder. The probe was held in place on the skin for one measurement, for 40 sec, to ensure that a stable value has been established. The values of the last 10 sec are averaged as the actual measurement values. An increase in TEWL values shows damage to the skin barrier function. | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | gram (g)/meter(m)^2/hour (g/m^2/hr) | Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 |
|
|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Clinical Grading of Wound Healing Parameter - Erythema | Change from baseline in Clinical grading of wound healing parameter (erythema) was evaluated on a scale of 0 (no erythema) to 4 (severe erythema). | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Clinical Grading of Wound Healing Parameter - Edema | Change from baseline in Clinical grading of wound healing parameter (edema) was evaluated on a scale of 0 (no edema) to 4 (severe edema). | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Day 0 (immediate after wound creation), Day 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15 and 16 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Composite Scar Score | Change from baseline in composite scar score was reported. It was calculated as the sum of the individual parameters on the Manchester Scar Scale (Color ranges 1 [perfect] to 4 [gross mismatch]), Finish ranges 1 [matte] to 2 [shiny], Contour ranges 1 [Flush with surrounding skin] to 4 [keloid], Distortion ranges 1 [none] to 4 [severe] and Texture ranges 1 [normal] to 4 [hard]). Composite Scar Scores range from 5 to 18, with 5 representing clinically best scars and 18 representing clinically worst scars. | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Baseline and Day 28 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Painful Score With Arm Resting by Side | Change from baseline in painful score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 1) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for pain/soreness in resting position as score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Painful Score With Arm in Normal Motion | Change from baseline in Painful Score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 3) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for pain/soreness in normal position as score from 0 (no pain) to 10 (severe pain). | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Change From Baseline in Itchy Score | Change from baseline in itchy score based on participants self-assessment questionnaire score (question 5) was reported. Participants were asked to rate each wound for itchiness as score from 0 (no itch) to 10 (severe itch). | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Mean | Standard Deviation | Scores on a scale | Baseline, Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Primary | Time to Complete Wound Healing | Time to complete wound healing: time(in days) elapsed from time of wound creation to 12 PM of day (up to Day 16) on which composite healing score(CHS) first meets complete healing criterion of being at least a score of 8 (threshold for complete healing). CHS was calculated from clinical grading of wound healing parameters as general wound appearance (0 [Poor-New or fresh wound with epithelium layer missing, wound bed appears raw and possibly oozing] to 4 [Excellent-Fully healed, skin flush against surrounding skin, slight color mismatch may be present])+smoothness (0 [Rough, uneven wound]- 4 [complete smoothness, even wound])+epithelial confluence (0 [None]- 4 [91-100%full epithelial growth]) - erythema (0 [None]- 4 [Severe]) - edema (0 [None]- 4 [Severe]) - crusting/scabbing (0 [None]- 4 [90-100% crusting/scabbing]). CHS on 25-point scale (-12 [no healing] to +12 [towards healing]) is indicative of extent of wound healing and was calculated for each wound site at each evaluation day. | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Median | Full Range | Days | Up to Day 16 |
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Pain Duration With Arm Resting by Side | Participants were asked to rate the pain as either brief, periodic, or constant in arm resting position with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire (question 2). Number of participants with pain duration (brief, periodic, or constant) with arm resting by side was reported. | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
| ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Secondary | Number of Participants With Pain Duration With Arm in Normal Motion | Participants were asked to rate the pain as either brief, periodic, or constant in arm normal motion with the Self-Assessment Questionnaire (question 4). Number of participants with pain duration (brief, periodic, or constant) with arm in normal motion was reported. | The Intent-to-Treat (ITT) set include all participants who received laser-induced wounds and started the study treatments. Here 'n' (number analyzed) included all evaluable participants analyzed at specified timepoints. As planned, for this outcome measure, the data was reported for each bandage separately. | Posted | Count of Participants | Participants | Day 1, 2, 3 and 4 |
|
Up to Day 28
Safety analysis population includes all participants who have IP applied at least once. As planned, adverse events were collected only on the whole participant level.
Not provided
| ID | Title | Description | Deaths (Affected) | Deaths (At Risk) | Serious Events (Affected) | Serious Events (At Risk) | Other Events (Affected) | Other Events (At Risk) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EG000 | All Randomized Participants | All Participants with Fitzpatrick skin types II (burns easily; tans minimum)-III (burns moderately; tans gradually) with uniform skin color on forearms, minor wounds were created on forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist received all eight intervention at the same time on the wounds created on forearms. Each wound site was subjected to one of eight randomly-assigned treatments included in an adhesive bandage that were: 1) a marketed adhesive bandage, 2) a marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 1), 3) a non-marketed adhesive bandage (IP-benchmark control 2), 4-7) four non-marketed adhesive bandages (IP#1, IP#2, IP#3, IP#4), and 8) no treatment (uncovered, negative control). Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandages were not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. | 0 | 36 | 0 | 36 | 34 | 36 |
Not provided
| Term | Organ System | Source Vocabulary | Assessment Type | Notes | Statistical Information |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Erythema | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Rash | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pruritus | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Blister | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Dry skin | Skin and subcutaneous tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Skin abrasion | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Thermal burn | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Animal scratch | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Arthropod bite | Injury, poisoning and procedural complications | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oedema | General disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pyrexia | General disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Pain in extremity | Musculoskeletal and connective tissue disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
| |
| Oropharyngeal pain | Respiratory, thoracic and mediastinal disorders | MedDRA 21.0 | Non-systematic Assessment |
|
If an investigator wishes to publish information from the study, a copy of the manuscript must be provided to the sponsor for review at least 60 days before submission for publication or presentation. If requested in writing, such publication will be withheld for up to an additional 60 days.
| Title | Organization | Phone | Extension | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Robin Mathew | Johnson & Johnson Consumer Inc. (J&JCI) | 908-904-5034 | rmathew1@its.jnj.com |
| Prot_000.pdf |
| SAP | No | Yes | No | Statistical Analysis Plan | Oct 21, 2019 | Oct 16, 2020 | SAP_001.pdf |
Not provided
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
| Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander |
|
| Black or African American |
|
| White |
|
| More than one race |
|
| Unknown or Not Reported |
|
|
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
| Day 1 |
|
|
| Day 2 |
|
|
| Day 3 |
|
|
| Day 4 |
|
|
| Day 5 |
|
|
| Day 6 |
|
|
| Day 7 |
|
|
| Day 8 |
|
|
| Day 9 |
|
|
| Day 10 |
|
|
| Day 11 |
|
|
| Day 12 |
|
|
| Day 13 |
|
|
| Day 14 |
|
|
| ANCOVA |
| 0.051 |
| Other |
Change from Baseline in TEWL measurements was analyzed within-treatment and between-treatment. The within-treatment comparison was performed at each baseline score within each treatment using paired t-test. The between-treatment comparison was performed by comparing the change from baseline between treatments using a mixed effect analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) model. |
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| OG002 | Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, marketed adhesive bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG002 | Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
| Marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-1 Benchmark Control 1 |
Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG003 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP-Benchmark Control 2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, benchmark control 2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG004 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #1 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#1 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG005 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #2 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#2 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG006 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #3 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#3 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
| OG007 | Non-marketed Adhesive Bandage IP #4 | Minor wounds were created on participant's forearms (four per arm) by a certified laser specialist. On the randomized wound site, non-marketed IP#4 bandage was applied. Bandages were changed daily/every other day until the wound reached a composite healing score of 8. The bandage was not left on after a composite healing score of 8 was achieved. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|