Original industry research · 2026

Help build the State of Aesthetic Treatment Documentation 2026

A three-minute, no-contact study for people who perform or directly manage aesthetic injectable documentation. See your own workflow-coverage snapshot immediately and help create a transparent public benchmark.

Take the 3-minute studyRead the methodology

Loading study progress…

No contact fields
We do not ask for your name, email, clinic name, account or free text.
No patient data
Do not enter patient, treatment, image or clinical-record information.
Publication gate
Findings stay hidden until at least 30 responses pass quality review.

Why this study exists

A benchmark built around the record—not another software list

Public aesthetic-industry reports often measure demand, confidence or business performance. This study asks a narrower operational question: what does a typical injectable treatment record routinely capture, how long does it take, and where does the workflow break down?

Cross-role

Open to physicians, dentists, nurses, nurse practitioners or prescribers, physician associates or assistants, and clinic operations staff directly involved in documentation.

Comparable

Every participant answers the same categorical questions. There are no open-ended answers to reinterpret.

Reusable

The methodology, sample size, field definitions and limitations will remain visible with any published findings.

Anonymous workflow study

Your current documentation workflow

Answer for the setting you know best. “Routinely captured” means recorded for a typical injectable treatment when the field is relevant—not merely available somewhere in the software.

Which elements are routinely captured when relevant?

Select every element that is consistently part of the treatment record.

How confident are you that a past record can be found complete when it is needed?
1 — Not confident5 — Very confident

Your answers are stored as categorical research data. The application does not store your IP address, contact details, account ID or a raw browser key with the response. A shared study link may add a pseudonymous distribution code that identifies the link, not you. Privacy.

Public benchmark

Findings release only when the evidence gate is met

Until 30 responses have passed quality review, we publish the collection count—not conclusions. After release, this section will show the sample size, average field coverage and cohort-level patterns without exposing raw responses or small demographic subgroups.

Version 1.0 methodology

Transparent rules before the first result

01

Population

Self-selected people who perform aesthetic injectable treatments or directly manage their documentation. Results are not a representative census of all providers.

02

Instrument

Ten categorical questions, including eight common record elements. No free text, clinical advice, treatment recommendation or patient data.

03

Quality controls

Same-origin submission, bounded payload, completion-time check, honeypot, rate limiting, random-key deduplication and review status.

04

Publication

Overall findings require at least 30 included responses. Any future demographic subgroup requires at least 10 included responses; smaller groups are suppressed or combined.

05

Limitations

Answers are self-reported, recruitment is non-random, terminology varies by market, and field presence does not prove record accuracy or care quality.

06

Commercial disclosure

The study is designed and operated by drylabs GmbH, which develops Aesthetic Pass. Product links are separated from the survey and do not affect inclusion.

Clinically reviewed by Dr. Adi Zoabi, MD

Study questions

Will you contact me after I respond?

No. The study does not ask for contact details. If you separately choose to create an Aesthetic Pass account, that is a different workflow.

Can an association share this without endorsing Aesthetic Pass?

Yes. It can link to the study invitation as an independently evaluated resource. No member list, endorsement or product adoption is required.

Is this a compliance audit?

No. It is a self-reported workflow benchmark. Requirements differ by role, treatment, jurisdiction and professional responsibility.