*For more information on how I do reviews see Diaper Test Methodology
SummaryThe FitRight Restore Brief is the most absorbent diaper in the FitRight line of products, just ahead of the FitRight Ultra. It features a cloth-like backsheet with a bit more absorbency over the Ultra to the point that it should reliably handle a single wetting in most circumstances. The pricing tends to be not much different between the two so I’d highly recommend going for this over the Ultra if you’re concerned about leaks. It still falls far below the standards of more premium diapers like the Seni Super Quatro or BetterDry, but comes at a more affordable price tag and is a decent step up from most generic store brands.
- Cloth-like backsheet
- Repositionable tapes
- Standing inner leak barriers
- Breathable design
- Surface dampness
- Low absorbency
- Sliding tapes
For the purpose of this post I will be reviewing and referring to the medium-sized FitRight Restore Diaper. However, other available sizes are listed below:
Manufacturer: Medline Industries Inc.
Units Per Bag: 20
Cost Per Unit: $$
Dimensions (L x W x H): 32.5 cm (12.8") x 17 cm (6.7") x 26 cm (10.2")
Weight: 2.2 kg (4.7 lbs)
Available Sizes: M, R, L, XL, XXL
Advertised Absorbency: Maximum
|1.1 FitRight Restore Packaging|
Backsheet: Cloth-like (non-woven)
Wetness Indicator: Yes
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: No
Rear Waistband: No
Folded Thickness: 1.7 cm (0.7")
Folded Length: 26 cm (10.2")
Dry Weight: 108 g (3.8 oz)
Diaper Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 81.5 cm (32.1") x 67 cm (26.4") x 31 cm (12.2") x 66 cm (26")
Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Rectangular, Rectangular
Padding Dimensions (L x fW x mW x bW): 61 cm (24") x 21 cm (8.3") x 16 cm (6.3") x 25 cm (9.8")
Padding Wing Dimensions (fPW x fPH x bPW x bPH): 2.5 cm (1") x 11 cm (4.3") x 4.5 cm (1.8") x 13 cm (5.1")
Padding Wing Shape (Front, Rear): Semicircle, Semicircle
Total Padding Area: 1148 cm2 (178 in2)
Tape Spacing (t1 x t2): 4 cm (1.6") x 15 cm (5.9")
Tape (W x L): 2.5 cm (1") x 5 cm (2")
|1.2 FitRight Restore Diaper|
Laboratory Absorbency Tests
Total Absorption Volume (after press out): 942 ml (33.2 oz)
Total Absorption Volume (before press out): 1167 ml (41.2 oz)
Time to Absorb Wettings (first to last): (51 s, 48 s, 55 s, 67 s, 66 s)
Wet Folded Thickness: 4 cm (1.6")
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 89%
Total Padding to Absorbency Ratio: 0.82 ml / cm2 (0.19 oz / in2)
Press Out Volume: 225 ml (7.94 oz)
Surface Dampness Rating: 6
The FitRight Restore showed little in the way of surface dampness on the first capacity test wetting, but there was substantial dampness on the second wetting. This aligns with the experience when testing the FitRight Ultra and was backed up in real world testing where dampness was a bit noticeable but not too bad.
|2.1 Wet vs Dry Diaper After Capacity Test|
|2.2 Used vs Unused Padding After Capacity Test|
"Real World" Absorbency Tests
Total Absorbed Volume: 692 ml (24.4 oz)
Total Wettings: (1 standing, 1 sitting)
Leaked After Sitting: No
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 75%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.60 ml / cm2 (0.14 oz / in2)
Standing-Sitting Rating: 5
The FitRight Restore had no trouble absorbing the first wetting when standing and there wasn’t any sign of leakage upon sitting shortly after. I did feel there was a little perspiration through the cloth-like backsheet, a common issue with such diapers but it wasn’t too bad. The second wetting while seated was mostly absorbed but there was a substantial leak through the rear leg gathers and I called the test at that. It still felt like the diaper had a bit more capacity and didn’t feel completely saturated but the surface dampness was notable. Having done this test I feel the FitRight Restore can consistently manage a single wetting with daily wear but I really wouldn’t push it past that.
Total Absorbed Volume: 767 ml (27.1 oz)
Total Wettings: 2
Used to Total Padding Ratio: 75%
Padding to Absorbency Score: 0.67 ml / cm2 (0.15 oz / in2)
Lying Down Rating: 5
The FitRight Restore performed only marginally better than the FitRight Ultra when tested while lying down. It absorbed the first wetting without obvious leaks, but there still seemed to be some minor perspiration through the cloth-like backsheet and lingering apparent surface dampness. It was eventually absorbed but I’d have concerns about pressout leakage and wouldn’t be surprised if some found it leaked on the first wetting. The second wetting resulted in a massive leak and it’s pretty clear this diaper will not take 2 wettings while lying down. I’d say it can take one wetting at best, so probably not the best suited for bedwetting.
|2.3 Pattern of Used vs Unused Padding Test Stand/Sit (right) Lying Down (left)|
Daily Wear and BedwettingThe FitRight Restore is ranked a notch higher than the FitRight Ultra in Medline’s absorbency ranking and our tests confirmed it. Otherwise the two diapers are very similar in most regards; both ranked well above the similarly designed Healthy Spirit diapers. I found it was able to manage a single wetting without leaking when worn during the day and for bedwetting. Since I rarely wet more than once per night before waking up I found this was sufficient, but I would expect some minor leaks if wet while sleeping on your side (once in a while moisture can make it between the leak guards and leg gathers and slowly leak out). This diaper remains quite breathable, even when wet, but like most cloth-backed diapers it is prone to some perspiration through the backsheet. Otherwise, I didn’t find it particularly clammy when worn and the padding is fairly comfortable when both wet and dry. I’d give it a slight edge for overnight use because I found the tabs susceptible to loosening with wear and tear. If both are similarly priced, I would highly recommend this over the Ultra. This diaper will give you extra confidence against leaks after a single wetting as it nudges capacity right to the point that will be sufficient for most wearers (I’d be more concerned with leaks in the Ultra). However, with only 100~150 ml (3.4~5.1 oz) of added capacity over the Ultra I don’t think it’s worth spending much more for the difference vs buying a comparable, but more absorbent, product like the Seni Super Plus.
Suitability for Bowel Incontinence: 5
The FitRight Restore isn’t optimal for bowel incontinence, being cloth-backed and without waistbands. Like many cloth-backed diapers it can also be susceptible to perspiration through its backsheet. I rank it slightly higher than the FitRight Ultra due to it having a bit more absorbency, but I don’t think that’s enough to overcome many of the other deficiencies in this regard.
Wear & Tear Tests
The FitRight Restore features a cloth-like backsheet with hook & loop tapes. The tapes can be repositioned multiple times after first applied, but will lose some adhesiveness with fastenings. The tapes are alright, but I’ve found they can easily become loose.
|3.1 FitRight Restore Fastener|
Ease-of-Use Rating: 6
I can’t say the FitRight Restore was any different from the FitRight Ultra in terms of ease-of-use as the design of each is virtually identical. Applying this diaper is easy with its repositionable hook & loop tabs, but the main issue is that they can lose stickiness with reattachments resulting in looseness/sagging.
|3.2 FitRight Restore Diaper Fit|
Comfort Rating (dry): 7
The FitRight Restore is about the same as the FitRight Ultra when it comes to dry comfort, again due to the nearly identical structure. The padding is quite soft and the diaper is super breathable but it can clump a bit over time. The tape loosening is another potential issue, I noticed it less on this than the Ultra, but that could just be down the batch. Overall, this diaper is comfortable but a few improvements could make it a lot more comfortable.
Comfort Rating (wet): 7
I give the FitRight Restore a slight edge over the FitRight Ultra when it comes to wet comfort due to its slightly better absorbency. It remains fairly breathable when wet, though far from the top performers with slight lingering dampness. The padding will clump a bit, but I noticed it less than in the Ultra. It has the same tapes as the Ultra and thus the same potential for sagging when wet. Otherwise, it isn’t too different from its dry state.
|3.3 FitRight Restore Topsheet and Backsheet|
Dry Padding Deterioration Proportion: 33.8% (topsheet), 31.8% (backsheet)
Shake Deterioration Test: 2 shakes to deterioration
Durability Rating (dry): 6
The FitRight Restore proved similar to the FitRight Ultra in the dry durability test. Although, on paper there was slightly more deterioration after the dry durability test, both were in the 20~30% deterioration range and test-to-test variability was a more likely factor than an actual difference in durability though perhaps slightly influenced by the denser padding. For this reason, I rank the two about the same. More generally, this diaper’s core padding held out during the test and I can’t see durability being a huge factor in reducing capacity. On the other hand, it has the same sliding tape problem and sagging could easily be an issue.
Durability Rating (wet): 6
The FitRight Restore wet durability is again similar to the FitRight Ultra. With a little more density the padding will hold out a little better than the Ultra, but not so much that I could justify ranking it the same as the Egosan Ultra. The biggest problem may again be the tapes, which can come loose; I noticed it less on this diaper than the FitRight Ultra so perhaps there have been some improvements but they don’t seem particularly different in design.
|3.4 FitRight Restore Dry Test Deterioration|
Front Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 6 cm (2.4"), 7 cm (2.8")
Back Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 6 cm (2.4"), 3 cm (1.2")
Side Rise Above Waistline (Jeans, Sweatpants): 4.5 cm (1.8"), 3 cm (1.2")
Profile Discretion Rating: 8
The profile of the FitRight Restore is almost identical to that of the FitRight Ultra in spite of perhaps a little more bulkiness. It has a high rise above the pantline but otherwise should be easy to conceal in most circumstances.
|4.1 FitRight Restore Jeans Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)|
|4.2 FitRight Restore Sweats Profile (left) vs Normal Underwear (right)|
Noise Rating: 9
The FitRight Restore is among the top performers for noise reduction. This diaper produces very little noise when moving around, likely mostly due to the tapes. It ranks comparable to the Tena PROSkin Stretch Night in this regard. For the most part you should be able to keep noise concealed and with underwear or meshpants to hold it in place no one will hear a thing.
|4.3 FitRight Restore Noise Profile|
Odor Reduction Rating: 5
The FitRight Restore comes in at the lower end when it comes to Odor Reduction, much like the FitRight Ultra. The cloth-like backsheet isn’t particularly good at retaining odors (and can perspire). It is also relatively quick to experience surface dampness and the looser fit will allow the escape of odors.
Want to give the FitRestore Restore a try?
Help us continue to produce quality reviews by making a purchase through our FitRight Restore affiliate link. With every purchase this blog will earn a small amount of commission at no extra cost to the purchaser.