Sunday, 22 January 2023

Tena Slip Original Maxi Adult Diaper Review

 *For more information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology


Summary

The Tena Slip Original Maxi is a premium high absorbency European diaper that closely resembles the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi and Ultima. The “original” in the name of this diaper appears to be a reference to the unusual history of Tena products in Europe. In the past, at the top of the European Tena was a product called the Tena Slip Maxi, which had a complete plastic backsheet and seemed almost identical to the current Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi; though perhaps with a little more bulkiness in its build. Then, early in the previous decade, it was given a cloth-like backsheet following the clothification trend at the time. This caused a bit of a consumer uproar as the Tena Slip Maxi was a very popular product, which in turn led to the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi; effectively the same plastic backed diaper as the original with a different name. The diaper with the cloth-like backsheet continued to be known as the Tena Slip Maxi until more recently it was renamed as the Tena PROskin Slip Maxi. At some point at that time Essity also decided to bring back the “original” Tena Slip Maxi, but it isn’t quite the original since the diaper they labelled “original” features cloth-like wings (breathable sides), whereas original Tena Slip Maxi was all plastic-backed.


So now we have the Tena Slip Original Maxi and it’s a hybrid diaper, not unlike the Attends Slip Active M10 but with a fit much like the original Tena Slip Maxi. This diaper provides a high amount of absorbency, taking about 2 wettings during daily or overnight wear before leakage would likely be a concern. It also rates highly for discretion and comfort, being one of the quietest plastic-backed diapers on the market. I found it to be slightly better suited to daily wear due to its cloth-like sides. I know it's received criticism in response to its misleading branding, but I don’t hold that against it. It’s nice to have this option in the line of Tena products and, for people who like plastic-backed diapers for protection but find themselves frequently overheating, this diaper is a perfect choice. However, I should note that this diaper does fit the often smaller European sizing and is not very forgiving if it turns out to be too small (plastic tapes won’t adhere well to cloth-like sides) so if you’re in the upper half of a size it may be best to go up a size.

Key Features:

  • Plastic backsheet
  • Cloth-like sides (wings)
  • Refastenable tapes
  • Rear waistband
  • Standing inner leak barriers

Pros:

  • Incredibly quiet during wear
  • Comfortable and breathable
  • Strong tapes + durable
  • Good absorbency

Cons:

  • Limited availability/sizing
  • Requires near perfect fit

Product Details

For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized Tena Slip Original Maxi Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:


Packaging

Brand: Tena
Manufacturer: Essity HMS North America Inc.
Origin: EU
Units Per Bag: 24
Cost Per Unit: $$$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 39 cm (15.4") x 16.5 cm (6.5") x 24 cm (9.5")
Weight: 3.2 kg (7.1 lbs)
Available Sizes: M, L
Advertised Absorbency: Maxi

1.1 Tena Slip Original Maxi Packaging

Diaper

Backsheet: Plastic (poly)
Wetness Indicator: Yes (two yellow lines down middle, blue when wet)
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: No
Outer Color: White (purple drops + text pattern down middle)
Inner Color: White
Front Waistband: No
Rear Waistband: Yes
Folded Thickness: 3 cm (1.2")
Folded Length: 25.5 cm (10")
Dry Weight: 142 g (5 oz)
Fragrance: No
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 80 cm (31.5") x 65 cm (25.6") x 27 cm (10.6") x 59 cm (23.2")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 60 cm (23.6") x 23 cm (9.1") x 15 cm (5.9") x 24 cm (9.5")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 4 cm (1.6") x 7 cm (2.8") x 4.5 cm (1.8") x 15 cm (5.9")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1091 cm2 (169 in2)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 3 cm (1.2") x 13 cm (5.1")
Tape (W x L): 3 cm (1.2") x 4 cm (1.6")

 

 

1.2 Tena Slip Original Maxi Diaper


Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 1183 ml (41.7 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 1208 ml (42.6 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (41 s, 41 s, 46 s, 46 s, 53 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 5 cm (2")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 95%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 1.08 ml / cm2 (0.25 oz / in2)
Press Out Volume: 25 ml (0.9 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 8

The Tena Slip Original Maxi performed well when it came to surface dampness. During the lab test there were no signs of surface dampness until the 3rd wetting and even then there was relatively little moisture present when dabbed with a paper towel. During real world testing surface dampness held up into the second wetting and shouldn’t be much of an issue before saturation.



2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test


2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test


"Real World" Absorbency Tests

Posture Tests


Standing-Sitting

Total Absorbed Volume: 1108 ml (39.1 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing, 2 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: No
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 99%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 1.18 ml / cm2 (0.27 oz / in2)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 8
The Tena Slip Original Maxi had no trouble absorbing the first wetting while standing during testing. All moisture was quickly absorbed with little perceivable surface dampness and no obvious pooling. There was no leakage upon sitting soon after. After the first wetting the padding around the crotch swelled a bit but there was still plenty of unused padding. The second wetting while seated was again fully absorbed without any leakage also though it did feel close to passing the leak guards at the front. At this point the front padding swelled considerably but the rear padding was still largely dry. The padding did a great job at constraining surface dampness and remained comfortable. On the third wetting the pooling at the front of the diaper finally overcame the leak guards and spilled through the breathable left-side. It wasn’t a huge leak but would easily have been noticeable. With plastic wings it may have even managed one more wetting before leaking as moisture would be redirected toward the rear padding. At the end of the test there was still a large area of unused padding at the rear. Given these results, I feel the Tena Slip Original Maxi will generally manage 2 wettings without leakage but I wouldn’t push it past that.


Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 1283 ml (45.3 oz)
Total Wettings: 2
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 99%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 1.18 ml / cm2 (0.27 oz / in2)

Lying Down Rating: 8

The Tena Slip Original Maxi performed quite well when tested while lying down. The first wetting was easily absorbed quickly with few signs of surface dampness and afterward there was still substantial unused padding. The second wetting was also fully absorbed but the padding felt very near saturation. Surface dampness wasn’t terrible but I suspect it would have been susceptible to pressout moisture at this point. The third wetting resulted in a massive leak, which lines up with the state of the diaper after the second wetting. At this point most of the padding was wet and surface dampness very obvious. After this test I’m confident this diaper should take up to 2 wettings while lying down, but 3 would really be pushing it. This puts it roughly in line with the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi, perhaps slightly more absorbent but not so much to take an additional wetting.

2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left)


Daily Wear and Bedwetting

The Tena Slip Original Maxi is a well rounded diaper with a good combination of comfort, discretion and absorbency. Of the diapers tested so far it’s most comparable to the Attends Slip Active Fit M10, being a hybrid with plastic backsheet over the core padding and cloth-like wings. I found the fit and absorbency to be a bit better in this diaper and its construct was very similar to the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi or Ultima. It has roughly the same amount of overall padding coverage as those two diapers, but I found it to be slightly wider in the mid section. When used for bedwetting I found this diaper sufficiently absorbent in most cases, but I wouldn’t say it’s foolproof. The cloth-like sides are susceptible to leaks if you’re a side-sleeper so you may need to be careful. Personally, I’ve never had an issue with a single wetting when worn for bedwetting, likely because it has a rapid absorption rate. However, I found there were some small leaks when multiple wettings happened when tested while lying down. Don’t expect this diaper to take more than 2 wettings without leakage when worn for bedwetting but it should be sufficient for most bedwetters, particularly those who aren’t side sleepers. In terms of daily wear this diaper worked surprisingly well, in fact I would say it’s a bit better suited for daily wear than overnight wear. Leaks through the side wings are less of an issue with daily wear as gravity will pull pooling into the central padding when standing/sitting. This diaper is also quite resistant to pressout when seated and I rarely noticed any leakage when sitting while wet. Additionally, the Tena Slip Original Maxi is highly discreet, particularly when dry. For a diaper with a plastic-backsheet this diaper is incredibly quiet, even wet, which is particularly rare for plastic-backed diapers. Moreover, it has the same great odor reducing capability as the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi and Ultima and a relatively slim profile when dry. That said, I found its profile discretion to be a little weaker than those other two diapers, particularly when wet where it will be a bit trickier to hide. The front padding has a tendency to bulge when wet, which may make it challenging to conceal. In its dry state I found it easier to conceal and highly durable. With its cloth-like side wings I feel this diaper could also be great for active wear as it readily dissipates heat. I wasn’t expecting to think much of this diaper when I started this review, but I’ve found myself partial to the “hybrid” design and am willing to give up perhaps a bit of absorbency for the added comfort of the breathable wings. This diaper was exceptionally good at maintaining skin health owing to its breathable design and resistance to surface dampness, I never noticed a trace of irritation or rashes during testing.


Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 9

Expect the Tena Slip Original Maxi to perform respectably when used for bowel incontinence. I couldn’t quite give it a perfect score as I have some concerns around odors due to the cloth-like wings. That said, it retains a snug fit with generous inner leak guards and a substantial area of rear padding. I have little doubt this diaper will do a good job at bowel containment. Having a plastic-backsheet over the core padding area is also a huge plus in blocking odors and preventing the “perspiration” that sometimes occurs in cloth-backed diapers.


Wear & Tear Tests


Fitting

The Tena Slip Original Maxi has an interesting “hybrid” design with a plastic backsheet and cloth-like breathable sides. This design has the benefit of skin comfort on the wings where skin irritation is often at its worst without losing the core protection provided by the plastic-backsheet over the core padding. This diaper uses the same double-tape adhesive mechanism found in the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi and Ultima, but tapes must be placed over the plastic part of the diaper to adhere properly.

3.1 Tena Slip Original Maxi Fastener

Ease-of-Use Rating: 7

The Tena Slip Original Maxi has a smaller European fit so it’s important to get the right size. Sizing is all the more important for this diaper because the tape adhesive will not stick well to the cloth-like sides, so if it comes small you may find it won’t even be unusable. For this reason I would err on the side of caution when it comes to the sizing and avoid a size if your waist falls in the upper half of the waist range. Otherwise, it's quite easy to get and maintain a snug fit with this diaper. It’s nearly full featured with a rear waistband and inner leak guards; however, I didn’t find the rear waistband adds much to the snugness. The tapes are high quality and held up well after multiple refastenings much like the similar Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi or Ultima. The taping mechanism also makes this diaper easier to wrap up after usage, unlike other hybrid style diapers with a hook & loop mechanism like the Rearz Barnyard Elite Hybrid or Tykables Little Rawrz. Due to the limited range in sizing I can’t rank this diaper too high in ease-of-use as some will find it doesn’t work, but for those who find a proper fit this diaper should prove quite user friendly.

3.2 Tena Slip Original Maxi Diaper Fit

Comfort


Comfort Rating (dry): 10

The Tena Slip Original Maxi earns top marks when it comes to dry comfort. This diaper has the same soft padding and plastic-backsheet as the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi and Ultima. Yet it also has the added bonus of breathable wings, making it a great choice for warmer weather. I never noticed any chafing while wearing this diaper nor did I have any skin irritation. It seems to be well built and very effective at retaining a snug fit without sagging. In some ways the Attends Slip Active Fit M10 is comparable to this diaper in that both have a hybrid type design with a double tape mechanism. However, that diaper has only a single double tape with an additional hook & loop mechanism to hold it in place while this one uses a standard 4 tape mechanism so it doesn’t have the problem with the hook & loop tapes coming into contact with the wearer's skin.


Comfort Rating (wet): 9

The Tena Slip Original Maxi is quite resistant to surface dampness and proved quite comfortable when wet. Unsurprisingly, it was very similar to the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi in this regard, perhaps slightly more so due to the breathable sides. The overall absorbency isn’t quite what you’d get from the Tena Slip Active Fit Ultima so I can’t quite rank it at the top as it will hit saturation relatively early. That said, it isn’t susceptible to clumping and while there was a little padding tearing it wasn’t noticeable during wear. The tape strength also holds up well under the weight of a wet diaper and I never had issues with sagging during testing.

3.3 Tena Slip Original Maxi Topsheet and Backsheet

Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 20.7% (topsheet), 15.7% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 2 shakes to deterioration


Durability Rating (dry): 8
The results of the dry durability test were surprising given how similar this diaper is to the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi. The amount of deterioration measured after the Tena Slip Original Maxi was much higher than the other two, but key areas of padding remained intact and much was due to padding collapsing between the legs.The mid-section padding on this diaper is about 1 cm  (0.4”), which could go a ways to explaining why there was more deterioration in this one. During testing I didn’t notice much in the way of clumping or tearing so I didn’t weight the deterioration as much as I otherwise might; the padding was in a good enough condition to remain functional and effective after the test. Moreover, there were no issues with the tapes after multiple refastenings and the wetness indicator didn’t show any effects from sweat/drips & dribbles.


Durability Rating (wet): 8

I found the wet durability of the Tena Slip Original Maxi to be similar to the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi. During testing there wasn’t any noticeable clumping and, in spite of the results from the dry durability test, I hardly noticed any tearing when wet. It didn’t perform particularly well on the wet shake test but I’ve found that test has little bearing on real world durability. All in all it didn’t feel much different from its dry state and the tapes held up very well under the weight of the wet diaper.

3.4 Tena Slip Original Maxi Dry Test Deterioration

Discretion Tests


Profile

Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 5 cm (2"), 5 cm (2")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 6 cm (2.4"), 5.5 cm (2.2")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 2.5 cm (1"), 3 cm (1.2")

Profile Discretion Rating: 7

The Tena Slip Original Maxi has a pretty discreet profile. With the wider mid padding, I noticed a bit more of a diaper bulge at the rear and crotch but not hugely compared with the active fit models. That said, this diaper has quite a bit of give and could probably be well suppressed with meshpants or regular underwear. Yet it’d be tougher to hide when wet as I found the bulge to be significant.

4.1 Tena Slip Original Maxi Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

4.2 Tena Slip Original Maxi Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right) 


Noise

Noise Rating:10

The Tena Slip Original Maxi earns top marks with respect to noise discretion. The combination of the exceptionally quiet plastic backsheet of the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi and cloth-like wings give this diaper a slight edge over the fully plastic-backed models. During testing I never noticed any crinkling or obvious noise with wear. I highly doubt anyone would notice noise from this diaper when worn outside the house, even without being covered by meshpants or underwear. Moreover, the lack of noise continued even when the diaper was wet, which is particularly rare for plastic-backed diapers.

4.3 Tena Slip Original Maxi Noise Profile

Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 10
I struggled to rank the Tena Slip Original Maxi in terms of odor reduction. I figured the cloth-like wings would make it more susceptible to odors but I didn’t find that to be the case. Once again, Tena seems to have mastered the ability to retain odors within the padding. Combined with this diaper’s snug fit odors are easily suppressed. You’re unlikely to notice many odors with this diaper.


Want to give the Tena Slip Original Maxi a try?

Help us continue to produce quality reviews by making a purchase through our Tena Slip Original Maxi affiliate link. With every purchase this blog will earn a small amount of commission at no extra cost to the purchaser.


Thursday, 29 December 2022

Nona Classic Slip Extra Adult Diaper Review

 *For more information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology


Summary

The Nona Classic Slip Extra is one of the lesser-known plastic-backed diapers and appears to mostly be sold in Germany. This diaper is full featured with dual waistbands, standing inner leak guards and refastenable tapes. This diaper does not have the absorbency you’ll find in popular competitors like the Molicare Slip Maxi, Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi or Abena Abri-Form M4. However, it does come at a far lower unit price that could make it an affordable option for those requiring frequent changes. During testing, I found this diaper to be quite durable and comfortable. It was consistently able to take a full wetting without leaking a bit, even under pressout conditions. I was impressed with its wicking ability, but it seems to have a relatively low absorbency threshold and will almost surely leak when wet more than once.

Key Features:

  • Plastic backsheet
  • Refastenable tapes
  • Dual waistbands
  • Standing inner leak barriers

Pros:

  • Very affordable
  • Soft topsheet and backsheet
  • Strong tapes + durable
  • Great wicking ability

Cons:

  • Low absorbency
  • Noisy
  • Surface dampness

Product Details

For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized Nona Classic Slip Extra Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:


Packaging

Brand: Nona
Manufacturer: S.I.CELL S.p.A. for MEDI-MARKT Homecare GmbH
Origin: EU
Units Per Bag: 25
Cost Per Unit: $$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 38 cm (15") x 16 cm (6.3") x 25 cm (9.8")
Weight: 2.6 kg (5.6 lbs)
Available Sizes: M, L
Advertised Absorbency: Extra


1.1 Nona Classic Slip Extra Packaging

Diaper

Backsheet: Plastic (poly)
Wetness Indicator: Yes (yellow line down middle, blue when wet)
Standing Inner Leak Guards: Yes
Leg Gathers: Yes
Product Style: Tab-Style Brief
Refastenable Tabs: Yes
Number of Tapes: 2
Repositionable Tabs: Yes
Outer Color: White
Inner Color: White
Front Waistband: Yes
Rear Waistband: Yes
Folded Thickness: 1.7 cm (0.7")
Folded Length: 25 cm (9.8")
Dry Weight: 100 g (3.5 oz)
Fragrance: No
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 83 cm (23.6") x 60 cm (23.6") x 29.5 cm (11.6") x 60 cm (23.6")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 63 cm (24.8") x 28 cm (11") x 16.5 cm (6.5") x 32.5 cm (12.8")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 5.6 cm (2.3") x 15 cm (5.9") x 8 cm (3.2") x 20 cm (7.9")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1532 cm2 (237 in2)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 3.5 cm (1.4") x 18 cm (7.1")
Tape (W x L): 3 cm (1.2") x 5 cm (2")


1.2 Nona Classic Slip Extra Diaper


Laboratory Absorbency Tests

Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 850 ml (30 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 900 ml (31.8 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (55 s, 52 s, 48 s, 52 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 4.5 cm (1.8")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 98%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.55 ml / cm2 (0.13 oz / in2)
Press Out Volume: 50 ml (1.8 oz)

Surface Dampness Rating: 4

The Nona Classic Slip Extra wasn’t particularly strong when it came to preventing surface dampness. During the lab test there were clear signs of surface dampness after the first wetting and it quickly reached saturation. During real world wear the surface dampness was fairly noticeable in parts of the padding after a single wetting, though its exceptional wicking ability helped and there was never much in the way of pooling.



2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test


2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test


"Real World" Absorbency Tests

Posture Tests


Standing-Sitting

Total Absorbed Volume: 600 ml (21.2 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing, 1 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: No
Used to Total Padding Ratio:100%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.39 ml / cm2 (0.09 oz / in2)

Standing-Sitting Rating: 6
The Nona Classic Slip Extra performed better than expected for daily wear. The first wetting while standing was quickly absorbed and distributed through the padding. There was a bit of surface dampness but it otherwise wasn’t too bad. There was no pressout leakage upon sitting shortly after. The second wetting while seated was nearly completely absorbed, the unused padding at the front of the diaper absorbed the bulk of it and the remainder wicked to the back. At this point there was minor leakage through the rear leg gathers and the diaper had obviously hit capacity so I stopped the test. I feel like this diaper should be reliable for 1 wetting during daily wear, but 2 would probably be pushing it. Even so, this is more than I expected. In spite of the thin padding it proved very proficient at wicking and at the end of the test the entirety of the padding was used.


Lying Down

Total Absorbed Volume: 650 ml (22.9 oz)
Total Wettings: 2
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 81%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.42 ml / cm2 (0.10 oz / in2)

Lying Down Rating: 6

The Nona Classic Slip Extra performed reasonably when tested while lying down. The padding is pretty thin but the first wetting was easily able to wick through the padding and was absorbed over a large area in the rear padding. There was no sign of leakage at this point but much of the padding was used and felt slightly damp but otherwise not too clammy. The second wetting ended up with pooling and a moderate leak through the rear leg gathers. The rear padding was completely saturated at this point, but the front padding was still largely unused. Even so it became obvious that it was starting to tear from the damp padding below. In general, if you only wet once per night this could be a decent choice for bedwetting, but you wouldn’t want to push your luck if you wet frequently through the night.

2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left)


Daily Wear and Bedwetting

The Nona Classic Slip Extra has a lot of great features for what might be considered a budget diaper. It features a plastic backsheet, dual waistbands, a wetness indicator and standing inner leak guards. However, it's relatively weak when it comes to absorbency and I found it can only reliably handle a single wetting without having to worry about leakage. In this way it reminds me a lot of the Depend Protection with Tabs, which is also full featured but with limited absorbency. Yet I found this diaper to be more comfortable than the Depend Protection with Tabs. The backsheet and leg gathers are softer and it feels a little less prone to heat. During testing I was impressed with its leak resistance after a single wetting. It has a fairly large area of padding and very effective wicking. I expected it to leak at least once when sitting after a wetting as often happens with lower absorbency diapers but I never noticed any leakage, nor did I notice any when worn for bedwetting. I suppose it’s possible if wet when sleeping on your side, but the plastic backsheet would likely just redirect it into the rear padding. So I feel very confident in this diaper's ability to consistently avoid leakage if you can change it after a single wetting. That said, it hits saturation fairly quickly and, once hit, leaks are very likely. I found this to be the case after a second wetting and I wouldn’t recommend this if worn for a longer duration without the aid of a booster. Moreover, even after a single wetting there will be some surface dampness which can lead to skin irritation if worn longer. In my case this diaper was generally effective for bedwetting since I rarely have multiple wettings and I found it to be pretty comfortable for this purpose. It wasn’t as good when tested during daily wear, mostly on account of how noisy it tends to be and the more obvious surface dampness when seated. I think it could be a great choice for daily wear when it can be changed shortly after a wetting, perhaps in a care home setting. All in all, I don’t feel I could ask for much more in this diaper given its pricing. I feel it would be great for some cases like bowel incontinence where you need to change immediately following bowel movement or other situations where you’d want to change shortly after a wetting without breaking the bank.


Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 9

The Nona Classic Slip Extra is well suited for bowel incontinence. In spite of its relatively low absorbency, the padding it does have provides extensive coverage, particularly up the rear. Moreover, it has a plastic backsheet which is often very important in cases of  bowel incontinence. It also features dual waistbands and standing inner leak guards to further block odors and prevent leakage. Not much I would really change for this diaper with respect to how it performs for bowel incontinence, but I think it would be better if it were a bit more absorbent.


Wear & Tear Tests


Fitting

The Nona Classic Slip Extra has two refastenable tapes per side, using the double tape to adhere to its plastic-backsheet. It also features dual waistbands, which are fairly large and flexible, making it easy to arrive at a snug fit. I found the tapes to be good quality during testing and never had an issue with them coming loose on me or weakening much with refastenings.

3.1 Nona Classic Slip Extra Fastener

Ease-of-Use Rating: 9

The Nona Classic Slip Extra is nearly as good as it comes with regards to user friendliness. It’s full featured with dual waistbands, standing inner leak guards and a wetness indicator. The tapes are pretty easy to add/remove, though you may want to be careful when removing for refastening to make sure you don’t pull up the underlying tape; though this is pretty much the case for any double-tape diaper. I found this diaper to be similar to the Carnation Adult Diaper in terms of ease-of-use with the actual stretchiness of the waistband putting this slightly above many other plastic-backed diapers. However, it’s far from the most absorbent on the market, so I’m ranking it assuming it can be changed after it hits a 1 wetting capacity.

3.2 Nona Classic Slip Extra Diaper Fit

Comfort


Comfort Rating (dry): 8

The Nona Classic Slip Extra is reasonably comfortable when dry. It has a soft plastic-backsheet with good heat distribution though less so than the Tena Slip Active Fit Maxi. The padding is fairly soft and covers a large area but is also relatively thin, which can make it feel like more skin is in contact with the backsheet and can increase any sensation from sweat. The thinner padding also makes it somewhat more susceptible to tearing, but I never had much of an issue with clumping in this diaper. Otherwise the fit is good and I never had issues with sagging or loosening while wearing.


Comfort Rating (wet): 6

The Nona Classic Slip Extra was similar to the Carnation Adult Diaper in terms of comfort when wet. It doesn’t have any issues with sagging and the backsheet keeps it relatively cool. I noticed a bit of padding tearing, but little in the way of clumping and the padding wasn’t too different from in its dry state. The primary issue affecting comfort in this diaper is the presence of surface dampness. While not as bad as the Depend Protection with Tabs, the surface dampness in this diaper will be noticeable after a single wetting likely owing to the thin padding and relatively low absorbency.

3.3 Nona Classic Slip Extra Topsheet and Backsheet

Durability

Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 15% (topsheet), 13.5% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 10 shakes to deterioration


Durability Rating (dry): 7
The Nona Classic Slip Extra came in a bit above average for dry durability. The thin padding was susceptible to tears and a fair amount of deterioration showed up after the dry durability test. However, little was in critical parts of the diaper and I didn’t notice any clumping. Even so, the padding thinness made the wetness indicator quite susceptible to sweat/minor drips/dribbles. Aside from that I found the tapes of this diaper to have good adhesiveness and they remained effective after multiple refastenings.


Durability Rating (wet): 7

The wet durability of the Nona Classic Slip Extra lined up with its dry durability. Again it was a little susceptible to padding tears but not clumping and the core padding remained well intact. It also performed surprisingly well in the “shake test”, withstanding 10 shakes before any significant sign of deterioration. However, I didn’t weigh this heavily in my scoring and diapers with thinner padding tended to do better in this test. Aside from that, the tapes on this diaper could easily hold up to added weight when wet and I never felt it loosening.

3.4 Nona Classic Slip Extra Dry Test Deterioration

Discretion Tests


Profile

Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 5 cm (2"), 4 cm (1.6")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 5.5 cm (2.2"), 4 cm (1.6")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 3.5 cm (1.4"), 2 cm (0.8")

Profile Discretion Rating: 7

The profile of the Nona Classic Slip Extra is comparable to the EasySlip Night or Attends Care Poly Briefs. The padding is thin but spacious so it can show a bit of a diaper bulge, particularly at the rear. However, I feel this can be easily concealed under meshpants or underwear. Moreover, there isn’t a significant difference between its wet and dry states.

4.1 Nona Classic Slip Extra Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)

4.2 Nona Classic Slip Extra Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right) 


Noise

Noise Rating: 5

The thinness of the padding in the Nona Classic Slip Extra works against its ability to dampen noise. This is a common issue with thinner plastic-backed diapers. There’s not much to force the padding to hold its shape so it tends to fold with movement, causing a distinctive crinkling noise, particularly when wet. I feel this could be mitigated to some extent with meshpants or underwear but I still feel it’d be tough to conceal completely.

4.3 Nona Classic Slip Extra Noise Profile

Odor Reduction

Odor Reduction Rating: 8
The Nona Classic Slip Extra excels in containment of odors. It owes this largely to the snugness of its fit with very flexible leg gathers and waistbands. That said, it’s not perfect as the padding is fairly thin and susceptible to surface dampness, so it might be more fair to say it’s containing odors rather than reducing them. Thus I can’t rate it at the top of the market in this regard, but for many this should be good enough.


Want to give the Nona Classic Slip Extra a try?

Help us continue to produce quality reviews by making a purchase through our Nona Classic Slip Extra affiliate link. With every purchase this blog will earn a small amount of commission at no extra cost to the purchaser.