RR1148 - Market surveillance of eye-protectors for lasers or intense pulsed light in the cosmetic industry
Laser and Intense Pulsed Light (IPL) sources are commonly used for medical and cosmetic procedures in the UK. The purpose of this study was to examine eye-protectors marketed for use with these light sources. The markings on the eye-protectors and the information provided with them were examined and compared to the relevant standards: EN 207 for laser eye-protectors; ISO 12609-1 or EN 166/EN 169 for IPL eye protectors. Only the markings and information were examined; no performance testing was conducted. All eye-protectors were purchased from suppliers in the UK. Based on a visual inspection, all of the eye-protectors purchased for this study were found to be in good condition and undamaged.
Products sold as laser eye-protectors
Of the nine eye-protectors purchased for this project, five had markings that were consistent with the relevant standard (EN 207), and the majority of the information required by EN 207 was provided. The following issues were identified with the remaining four eye-protectors:
- One had markings consistent with EN 207, but no information provided. Without the manufacturer’s information, the potential for misuse of the eye-protector is increased.
- One had markings that were consistent with EN 207, but the markings were on a sticker that was easy to peel off. If the markings became detached, the user would have no way of knowing if the eye-protectors were suitable for their task.
- Two had no markings and no information provided with them. If they are laser eye-protectors, they lack crucial information required by the user in order to use them safely. It is also possible that they are not laser eye-protectors, but were mis-sold as laser eye-protectors.
Products sold as IPL eye-protectors
Of the nine IPL eye-protectors purchased for this project, five had markings consistent with a relevant IPL eye-protector standard (EN 166/EN 169 or ISO 12609-1), and the majority of the required information was provided. The following issues were identified with the remaining four eye-protectors:
- One had markings consistent with the relevant standard, but the information provided was for laser eye-protection. The performance characteristics and marking of laser eye-protectors and IPL eye-protectors are different, and some of the information provided was therefore incorrect (for example, the explanation of the markings).
- Two had markings on the oculars that were consistent with EN 166 and EN 169, but no relevant markings on the frames (EN 166 requires markings to be present on both ocular and frame). The information provided was for laser eye-protectors, not IPL eye-protectors (see above).
- One referenced EN 166 in markings on the frame, but was not marked according to EN 166 on the ocular. There were no markings to identify the filtering capability of the eye-protector. Some information was provided, but this did not include anything about the capability of the eye-protector. There was insufficient information for a user to determine whether this eye-protector would be suitable for their task.
Assistance in the use of Adobe Acrobat PDF files is available on our FAQs page.