The Real-World Challenges of Aesthetic Dermatology Clinical Trials
Aesthetic dermatology is a growing segment in the clinical research world. New injectables, energy-based devices, and topical innovations are flooding the pipeline. Effectively bringing potential new treatments to market isn’t just about innovation, it’s about precise clinical execution. And the clinical trials that test aesthetic products come with their own unique set of hurdles.
Here’s what no one tells you about running an aesthetics study—and why it can be harder than it appears.
1. Fast Timelines, Zero Margin for Error
Unlike other clinical studies, aesthetic dermatology trials are often completed in weeks or months—not years. That compressed timeline can sound appealing, but in practice, it puts enormous pressure on sponsors, sites, and vendors to have every detail nailed from day one.
You don’t have time to course-correct mid-study. Your protocol, recruitment materials, image capture plan, and data workflows all need to be rock solid upfront. One delay—IRB hiccups, late imaging equipment, misaligned scheduling—and your timeline slips, threatening the whole study.
“With derm aesthetics, you're sprinting from the starting gun. There's no room for protocol amendments or recruitment resets. Everything has to be lined up before the first subject walks in,” says Murray Jensen, Managing Director of Ethica CRO, a CRO specializing in dermatology and aesthetic clinical research.
2. Enrollment is Especially Tough with Novel Products
In therapeutic dermatology, patients are often motivated by unmet medical needs. But in aesthetics, people are typically healthy – and cautious. Asking them to try an unapproved product, especially one that affects their face or skin long-term, is a tough sell.
The fear isn’t abstract. Patients wonder: What if this makes me look worse? What if I can't undo the results? That’s a massive barrier when the whole motivation is to look better, not to take risks.
Jeanette Poehler, Director of Strategy at dermatology clinical research site Moradi MD says “You’re asking people to gamble with their appearance. That’s not a decision anyone takes lightly. For novel products, you need to spend more time educating and building trust.”
3. Diversity is a Persistent Gap
Diverse representation in aesthetic trials is still lagging. Many investigational products behave differently across skin tones, yet the majority of trials still skew toward lighter Fitzpatrick types. That’s not just an equity problem, it’s a scientific one.
Sponsors know they need more inclusive enrollment, but they often underestimate the extra effort required to reach underrepresented communities. That includes translating materials, adjusting imagery, addressing medical mistrust, and expanding beyond traditional recruiting channels.
“If you want diverse patients, you can’t just hope they walk in the door. You need a plan—real outreach, real partnerships, and real cultural competency baked into the protocol,“ says Robin McIntosh, a clinical operations expert with 30 years experience.
4. Beauty is Subjective—Which Complicates Data
Success in aesthetic trials isn’t just about numbers, it’s about perception. Patient-reported outcomes, photographic assessments, and blinded reviews are often part of the endpoint strategy. That means consistency in image capture, lighting, positioning, and evaluator training is critical.
Any variation in these elements can compromise data integrity, especially when you’re looking for subtle but meaningful improvements.
Heather Haselmann from Canfield Scientific, responsible for the clinical imagine behind some of the biggest aesthetic products on the market today says “In aesthetic trials, the data lives in the details. A slight change in lighting or camera angle can skew perceptions—and outcomes. You’re not just measuring improvement, you’re capturing it in a way that stands up to regulatory and clinical scrutiny.”
Planning is the New Power Play
Aesthetic dermatology trials may be short, but they’re anything but simple. From front-loaded planning to high-stakes enrollment and diversity demands, these studies require next-level foresight and coordination. Sponsors who underestimate that risk costly delays… or worse, trials that don’t generate usable data.
As more novel treatments flood this space, getting ahead of these challenges isn’t optional, it’s essential.
