Journal of Aesthetic NursingVol. 7, No. 1 Guest EditorialFree AccessThis sector needs laser protection supervisorsMike MurphyMike MurphySearch for more papers by this authorMike MurphyPublished Online:5 Feb 2018https://doi.org/10.12968/joan.2018.7.1.6AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsPermissions ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InEmail Laser safety is critical. Many of the Class 4 lasers used routinely in today's clinical centres are very powerful machines, and their use can inflict serious damage to the eyes and the skin. Laser practitioners therefore need to ensure safety is a high priority at all times, to prevent injury to staff and patients.I recently spoke with several insurance companies and they all had the same observation to share: the number of laser-related claims is going through the roof. The main reason for this is simply a lack of proper training and understanding—many laser operators are not following safety protocols and/or are not using the correct safety equipment. Without a significant change in attitude and approach to treatment, the number of incidents, accidents and insurance claims will inevitably increase.All Class 4 lasers are potentially hazardous to the human eye. Many emit invisible light, so you will not know your eyes have been exposed until you feel or hear a ‘pop’! The best way to protect yourself is using the proper safety glasses, yet many suppliers do not routinely supply them with their lasers.Following the Keogh review in 2013, Health Education England (HEE) published a report in November 2015 which described a new framework of qualifications for the aesthetics sector (HEE, 2015). This applies to all aesthetic practitioners and therapists involved in delivering laser, intense pulsed light (IPL) and light-emitting diode (LED) treatments in the skincare field, and should help to improve safety standards.Most insurance companies now require all Class 3B/4 laser and IPL providers to have taken the Core of Knowledge course. The syllabus for this course is set down by the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (MHRA), and is defined in its guidance on safe use in medical, surgical, dental and aesthetic practices (MHRA, 2015). Some London borough authorities require treatment providers to undergo training in the Core of Knowledge before issuing them a licence to practice.Many lasers used for the removal of hair, blood vessels, pigmentation, tattoos and skin rejuvenation are Class 4 systems. Without proper training in the Core of Knowledge (delivered by a qualified laser protection advisor (LPA), as recommended by HEE), it is difficult to see how anyone can truly understand what they are doing with their laser, or the associated hazards. When I spoke with the insurance companies, I asked if they would be interested in encouraging their clients to appoint properly trained laser protection supervisors (LPS). They responded positively to this suggestion, for obvious reasons. In most parts of the UK, there is no legal requirement for LPS to work within the private sector; however, not only is it good practice to employ LPS, but also some insurance companies have indicated that such clients might receive preferential premiums as a result of doing so.Without a good understanding of lasers and their hazards, safety will always be compromised—that is when accidents happen. A good risk assessment of your laser room, coupled with having a properly trained LPS, will help to minimise unwanted incidents. But laser safety must be a constant priority, not merely an annual safety check, and it must involve everyone. References Health Education England. Part one: qualification requirements for delivery of cosmetic procedures: Non-surgical cosmetic interventions and hair restoration surgery. 2015. https://tinyurl.com/z43cs8s (accessed 19 January 2018) Google ScholarMedicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency. Lasers, intense light source systems and LEDs—guidance for safe use in medical, surgical, dental and aesthetic practices. 2015. https://tinyurl.com/y8nsycn8 (accessed 19 January 2018) Google Scholar FiguresReferencesRelatedDetails 2 February 2018Volume 7Issue 1ISSN (print): 2050-3717ISSN (online): 2052-2878 Metrics History Published online 5 February 2018 Published in print 2 February 2018 Information© MA Healthcare LimitedPDF download