Background and Objective: A number of lasers are available for cutaneo
us periorbital surgery, yet not all eye shields are appropriate for al
l applications. We tested a variety of commercially available eye shie
lds to assess their safety features. Study Design/Materials and Method
s: Six commercially available eye protectors were studied. A focused l
aser was incident upon the shield, and the intensity and exposure dura
tion required for visible damage to the shield were measured. We then
measured the temperature on the underside of the eye shield during exp
osure from the laser. Time-dependent temperature measurements were mad
e with a type-T thermocouple fixed to the eye shield with silicon grea
se. Results: Thermal response curves and rates of warming for each of
the six eye shields were generated. Plastic shields showed significant
thermal damage with most of the lasers tested. The metallic shields w
armed more slowly and to a lesser degree. Conclusion: Overall, the met
allic eye shields had the most acceptable safety profile. Many of the
plastic shields exhibited significant thermal damage, and therefore we
discourage their use in periorbital laser surgery. (C) 1996 Wiley-Lis
s, Inc.