All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

"Low degree" + "Very low degree / Not at all" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For reliability answered on a 5-point scale the answers some, high, or very high degree was considered acceptable and grouped against answers of 'low or very low' degree of reliability.

"Some degree", "High degree" and "Very high degree" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. For ability to move with test product it was tested if the proportion evaluating same or better was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. The answers of 'same, better or much better' was grouped against the answers of 'worse or much worse' ability to move.

"Same", "Better" and "Much better" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

Users worry of leakage given on a 5-point scale was analyzed by a proportional odds ratio model taken the paired design into consideration to compare the results from V1 and V2.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

"Higher degree" and "Much higher degree" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion with a positive response was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion answering I felt more confident was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

"Yes, to the better" was tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

"Higher degree" and "Much higher degree" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

"High degree" and "Very high degree" were tested against the rest of the answers in this analysis.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level. For questions answered on a 5-point scale the answers was grouped in 2 (e.g. "higher" or "much higher" against the rest of the answers).

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

For secondary endpoints where the possible answer is Yes or No, the proportion of subjects answering "Yes" was calculated. By use of an exact test in the binomial distribution a 95% confidence interval was estimated for the proportion. It was tested if the proportion was significantly different from 50% when using a 5% test level.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.

All subjects enrolled into the study (n=25) who have at least one measure on any of the outcomes measured.

Single arm, open-label investigation with subjects assigned to use test product for 21±3 days.

Due to technical reasons, data from the questionnaire at V2 for two subjects could not be retrieved from the phones and therefore have been omitted from statistical analyses. Data from the two subjects provided at V1 were included, whenever possible. Therefore, the total number of subjects in the statistical analyses at V1 was n=25, while at V2 the number was n=23.