Super Patch research library: every study, rated honestly
By Kenan · reviewed by Dionne Brown, RMT · no fabricated studies ·
If you want the short version first, read our honest verdict: does Super Patch work? — or, for the sleep patch specifically, our full Super Patch REM review. This page is the deep evidence file behind both.
1. The RESTORE Study — published RCT (2025) Strongest evidence
The flagship: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of the Freedom patch versus a sham patch in 118 adults, measuring pain. It reported a drop of roughly 2.75 points in pain (p<0.001) with mobility gains and no adverse events. Published in Pain and Therapy (2025;14(6):1797–1807), PMID 41057672, DOI 10.1007/s40122-025-00780-0. Important caveat: it's company-funded with no independent replication yet, and it is about pain — its numbers do not transfer to sleep, energy, or any other patch.
2. RESTORE-001 / NCT06505005 — larger confirmatory trial Ongoing — no results
A second, larger gold-standard trial (~150 adults, same rigorous design), registered as NCT06505005. This is a different study from the published RESTORE RCT above. Status (checked Aug 2026): still ongoing. The trial's estimated completion date (~May 2026) has now passed, but no results have been posted yet — we re-check this monthly.
3. HARMONI (sleep & pain) Weak — not blinded
Reported sleep, quality-of-life and pain-interference gains, but the design isn't randomized or blinded and appears in a low-recognition venue. Suggestive, not conclusive — and this is the closest thing to direct sleep evidence, which tells you how preliminary the sleep story still is.
4. Anxiety study Modest — indexed
Published in the Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care (PubMed-indexed; PMC12488145). A better venue than most, but still small.
5. Broader vibrotactile science Plausibility, not proof
Real peer-reviewed reviews of vibrotactile stimulation exist (e.g. PMC8072538 on balance/gait) — but they study active devices, not this passive patch. They establish that sensory input can matter; they do not prove this product works.
In the media
Founder Jay Dhaliwal and the company were profiled in Forbes (Apr 2026) and TechTimes (May 2026). Figures in those pieces are company-reported. (We don't cite a specific R&D spend — reported figures conflict.)
Independent vibrotactile science — context, not proof of this patch
Strength: supports plausibility of the mechanism only — these are independent studies of different, active devices, not the Super Patch.
Two 2026 peer-reviewed studies — neither funded by nor about Super Patch — add independent weight to the general idea that vibrotactile (touch/vibration) signals can produce measurable effects in the nervous system. They do not test this patch, and they don't show it works. We include them because being honest about the real, independent science is more useful than hype.
- Systematic review — vibrotactile stimulation in focal dystonia (Dystonia, 17 April 2026). A review of the evidence reported response rates of roughly 57–85% across studies for modulating abnormal muscle activation. Why it matters: independent, peer-reviewed support that touch-based input can change nervous-system output — for an active stimulation device, in a specific clinical condition. Not the passive patch, not a general wellness claim. DOI 10.3389/dyst.2026.15695
- Randomized controlled trial — vibrotactile positional therapy for sleep apnoea (2026, PubMed 40992934). An independent RCT using a vibrotactile signal to change body position during sleep reported measurable physiological effects. Why it matters: another independent, blinded-design data point that vibrotactile signals can do something real — again with a different, active device and a different mechanism than a passive skin patch. PubMed 40992934
The honest line: independent vibrotactile research establishes that the underlying idea is plausible. It does not prove that Super Patch's passive, drug-free patch produces these effects. For evidence about the patch itself, the strongest data is still the single company-funded RESTORE pain trial above.
Explore the patches at recovery.superpatch.com →
Frequently asked questions
Is there real science behind Super Patch?
Yes, some — most notably a 2025 randomized, placebo-controlled trial of the Freedom pain patch. But much of the rest is small or self-reported, and the strong trial is company-funded and not yet independently replicated.
Has the big confirmatory trial reported results?
Not yet. RESTORE-001 (NCT06505005) is still ongoing; its estimated completion date has passed but no results are posted. We re-check monthly.
Is there proof the sleep (REM) patch works?
No strong proof. The direct sleep evidence is preliminary and not blinded; the one rigorous trial was about pain, not sleep.
Affiliate disclosure: Kenan is an Affiliate of The Super Patch Company and earns a commission on purchases made through links on this site, at no extra cost to you.
These statements have not been evaluated by the Food and Drug Administration. Super Patch products are not intended to diagnose, treat, cure, or prevent any disease. “FDA registered” is not the same as “FDA approved.” This site is not medical advice; individual results vary. Reviewed for accuracy by Dionne Brown, RMT. Affiliate, The Super Patch Company · That Recovery Room.