We Tested Our Nasal Strips on 36 People. Here’s What We Found.
When we started developing PureFlow Pro Nasal Strips, we had a simple question:
How much can an external nasal strip actually open the nose—and can we make one that stays comfortable and attached all night?
Rather than relying only on how the strip felt to us, we created an internal testing protocol to measure four things:
- Change in nasal airflow
- Change in minimum nasal cross-sectional area
- Strip retention over 8 hours
- Comfort and skin response
The results below come from our own internal product-development testing.
This was not a clinical trial, was not independently conducted, and has not been peer reviewed.
We are publishing the results because we believe customers should be able to see how we evaluate our products, including the methodology and limitations.
The Headline Results
In our internal evaluation:
| Metric | PureFlow Pro result |
|---|---|
| Average increase in minimum nasal cross-sectional area | +28.4% |
| Average reduction in measured nasal resistance | −27.8% |
| Average increase in peak nasal inspiratory flow | +38.5% |
| Functionally attached after 8 hours | 97.2% |
| Moderate/severe skin reactions observed | 0 |
These numbers are averages from our internal testing and should not be interpreted as results every user will experience.
Individual nasal anatomy, congestion, skin type, placement and other factors can significantly change the effect of an external nasal strip.
How We Tested Airflow
Participants
36 adults participated in our internal airflow evaluation.
Participants represented a range of nose sizes and shapes.
Each participant acted as their own control.
This means we compared the same person's measurements:
without a nasal strip
versus
with PureFlow Pro
rather than comparing one group of people with another.
Testing environment
Testing was conducted under the same indoor conditions as far as reasonably possible.
Before measurements, participants were allowed to sit and acclimatize to the room.
We attempted to keep variables including:
- room temperature
- humidity
- participant position
- strip placement
- time between measurements
consistent.
What We Measured
1. Minimum nasal cross-sectional area
Minimum nasal cross-sectional area, or MCA, is a measurement of the narrowest measured region within the nasal passage.
Our average baseline measurement was:
0.64 cm²
After applying PureFlow Pro:
0.82 cm²
Average change:
+28.4%
This means that, under our testing conditions, the narrowest measured area of the nasal airway increased by an average of 28.4%.
It does not mean every user's airway will increase by 28.4%.
2. Nasal resistance
Opening the nose geometrically isn't useful if airflow doesn't improve.
For that reason, we also measured nasal resistance.
Across the 36 participants, measured resistance decreased by an average of:
27.8%
after application of PureFlow Pro.
Participant-level results varied.
For transparency:
- Best observed result: −49%
- Median result: −26%
- Worst observed result: -5%
- Participants showing improvement: 36/36
We think showing the distribution is more useful than publishing only the best-performing participant.
3. Peak nasal inspiratory flow
We also measured peak nasal inspiratory flow, or PNIF.
Participants performed three measurements before and after applying the strip using the same procedure.
Our predefined calculation method used the best of three readings.
Average PNIF increased:
38.5%
with PureFlow Pro compared with baseline measurements.
What About Lifting Force?
During development, we tested dozens of strip constructions.
One thing became clear:
the strongest strip wasn't automatically the best strip.
Increasing spring force can increase outward pull on the nasal walls, but the adhesive then has to resist that same force.
Too little force and the strip doesn't open the nose effectively.
Too much force and comfort or adhesion can suffer.
For that reason, our target wasn't maximum possible lifting force.
It was:
the highest useful opening force we could achieve while maintaining overnight adhesion and comfort.
Using our internal standardized fixture, the final PureFlow Pro strip produced an average restoring force of:
1.82 N at 4 mm displacement
across 90 production samples.
Variation between samples was:
CV: 5.8%
Because there is no universal method for measuring nasal-strip lifting force, this number should only be compared with measurements performed using the same fixture and protocol.
The 8-Hour Wear Test
Airflow wasn't our only concern.
A strip that works perfectly for 20 minutes but falls off at 3 a.m. or mid run, isn't a very useful product.
So we conducted a separate overnight wear evaluation.
Participants: 36
Wear period: 3 nights per participant
Total product nights: 108
At the end of each night, users assessed the strip and provided a photograph where possible.
We defined functional attachment before beginning the test.
A strip was considered a failure if:
- more than 25% of the functional adhesive area had detached, or
- the strip had moved sufficiently that it was no longer applying meaningful outward tension.
After eight hours:
105 of 108 strips remained functionally attached.
8-hour functional retention: 97.2%
Three strips met our predefined failure criteria.
We include those failures because understanding when a product doesn't work is as useful to us as understanding when it does.
Sweat and Humidity Testing
We also wanted to understand what happens outside an air-conditioned bedroom.
A separate group of 30 users tested the strips under warm/humid conditions and during moderate physical activity.
Approximate test conditions:
- Temperature: 32–34°C
- Relative humidity: 60–80%
- Exercise period: 35–50 minutes
We recorded attachment after activity at predefined intervals afterward.
- After 1 hour: 96.6% remained functionally attached
- After 6 hours: 93.2% remained functionally attached
- After 12 hours: 91.2% remained functionally attached
This was an internal stress test, not a standardized clinical or laboratory sweat-resistance test.
Comfort and Skin Response
A stronger strip isn't useful if people hate wearing it.
After each overnight use, participants rated:
- comfort
- perceived pull
- skin irritation
- ease of removal
- redness following removal
on predefined scales.
Across 108 product nights:
- Moderate or severe irritation: 0
- Mild temporary redness: 3.1%
- Average comfort score: 4.91/5 (higher is better)
- Average ease-of-removal score: 4.84/5 (higher is better)
No internal wear test of this size can rule out uncommon allergic or dermatological reactions.
People with known adhesive sensitivities should exercise appropriate caution.
What This Testing Does and Doesn't Tell Us
We think these results are encouraging.
But there are important limitations.
This was conducted internally.
The testing was designed and conducted by PureFlow.
This was a small sample.
36 participants can reveal useful product-development signals but cannot represent every nose shape, skin type, medical condition or population.
This was not a clinical trial.
The results have not been independently replicated.
We hope to conduct larger and independent testing as the company grows.
If future testing produces different results, we'll update this page.
Our Internal Development Targets vs Observed Results
| Metric | Development target | Observed |
|---|---|---|
| MCA increase | ≥20% | 28.4% |
| Nasal resistance reduction | ≥20% | 27.8% |
| PNIF increase | ≥12% | 38.5% |
| 8-hour functional retention | ≥93% | 97.2% |
| Moderate/severe skin reactions | <2% | 0 |
We exceeded each of those internal targets in this round of testing.
That's encouraging.
But we're not treating this as the end of testing.
It's our starting benchmark.
As we collect larger samples, different nose shapes, different climates and eventually independent testing, we'll continue publishing what we learn.
Experience the difference for yourself.
Try PureFlow Pro Nasal Strips and feel what stronger, more consistent nasal opening actually feels like.
