The only professional IPL HAIR REMOVAL
device medically certified for personal use AT HOME
Support: (int +61) 7 3393 9342

methodology of the clinical Study

E-Swin, the manufacturer of the E-One in France, founded a scientific committee in order to effectively evaluate the E-One’s performance against the other professional IPL devices. The committee consisted of dermatologists, doctors, lecturers, and hair specialists to ensure that their findings were comprehensive. The aim was to conduct a broad spectrum of tests in many different scenarios to establish how the E-One performs, and to also evaluate its performance against leading IPL devices on the market.

In 2008, the committee commenced a clinical study under medical care. The survey were involving both 63 male and female volunteers, ages ranging from 18 to 55 years old, with a diverse range of skin types from phototypes II, III and IV.

The initial phase of the study was carried out in a famous hospital in Paris and also in a clinic located in Aix en Provence. The goal was to confirm the absolute tolerance levels of the treatment and to rate the superiority of IPL technology versus wax hair removal. Waxing was used for comparison as it is the most widely used form of hair removal methods. The trial focused on hair removal from the underarm area. Randomly selected individuals were chosen to undergo a hair removal session, with a balance of E-One treatment and wax depilation.

Examinations were then performed by dermatologist 15 minutes and 24 hours post treatment. 2 external experts in dermatology, external from the main committee, examined and provided an evaluation on the pictures of each subjects’ underarm area. They were not informed of the methods used.

Photographic images were taken in order to monitor progress every 7 weeks by the laboratory technicians. Subsequent hair removal sessions and dermatological examinations were conducted post treatment.

Tolerance

The results show that there are no long-lasting irritating effects when using the 2 techniques.

  • 15 minutes after hair removal, we noticed very light redness amongst only 21% of the participants using the E-One (versus 46% with waxing) and in any case, no important redness (versus 11% with waxing).
  • After 24 hours, with the E-One, only 3% still have light redness (7% for waxing).
  • 15 minutes after hair removal, we notice a very light inflammation for only 7% (14% for waxing) and after 24 hours, there is no inflammation with both techniques.

The Results

Average of the results according to the two investigators.

This chart shows the user's preference after removing hair with the E-One and with a traditional waxing treatment over 343 days.
After only 2 treatments, the results are very positive since 85% of users prefer using the E-One than doing waxing.

Preference evolution

Guidelines: safety of light-based home use hair removal devices

Dr Godfrey Town and his colleagues run a great clinical study in 2011 called ‘Guidelines on the safety of light-based home-use hair removal devices from the European Society for Laser Dermatology (ESLD)’.

These guidelines provide a definition of IPL for home use, to inform beauty and health professionals about light-based technology.

It compares different systems available on the market and explains that the E-One "should probably be treated as equivalent to other professional medical devices on the market".

View the review article

Journal of the European Academy of Dermatology and Venereology ª

Check out our E-One videos

Read our Blog