Skip to main content
All CollectionsComparing the Luma to Other Devices
Comparing MedcoVet to Class IV PBM Devices
Comparing MedcoVet to Class IV PBM Devices

Discover the advantages of MedcoVet over traditional Class IV PBM devices for advanced pet laser therapy.

Brittney Martinson avatar
Written by Brittney Martinson
Updated over a year ago

The most common question we receive about the Luma is whether it can be as effective as a high-powered Class IV PBM device (e.g. K-Laser or Companion).

Questions typically fall into two categories:

  1. Doesn’t a class IV device penetrate much more deeply than a lower-class device? After all, reaching the target tissue is critical to positive outcomes.

  2. Even if a lower-powered device does reach the target tissue, won’t it take hours to deliver the same dose as a class IV device? Clearly, multiple-hour treatments would not be tolerated by the patient, nor would it fit into a busy practice schedule.

Below is an excerpt from a website that speaks directly to the concerns of class IV users, and unfortunately and inaccurately confirms those concerns.

The purpose of this white paper is to address those key concerns and offer research from scientists in the field who are unaffiliated with MedcoVet. In all cases, we present the research in its entirety(in the appendix), for the reader's review. Our goal is to offer a counterpoint to these claims and leave it to the reader to draw their own conclusions.

Before addressing the two points above, we want to clarify that the argument for class IV laser therapy is really an argument for high-powered devices. Laser classification is really about eye safety and class IV devices (because of their higher power) pose a large hazard to the eyes, which is why they are used by trained experts. It is possible, however to have an eye-safe device that has significant power. From Jan Tuner and Lars Hode:

To be clear, MedcoVet does not have the same power as a Companion PBM device, but it does have output power higher than 500mW which is the commonly cited threshold for class IV devices. Given this power, but because of the other parameters Tuner and Hode mention, it is a class I device and eye-safe without goggles.

Now that we have moved away from safety classification and are speaking about power, the question still stands. Do high-powered devices penetrate more deeply and treat much more quickly than low-powered devices? The short answer is no. Here is why:

  1. The key factors that impact penetration depth are wavelength and pressure/contact with the skin, not power. While power does matter, a good rule of thumb is that 2x power = 10% more penetration. See the footnoted article and Appendix A, for a detailed explanation of what affects penetration depth. If the high-powered device uses between 800 and 850nm infrared, then it is penetrating deeply. If the device is using 980nm, then it is being absorbed by water and not penetrating (note there are class IV devices that offer 800-850nm light).

  2. Still, using the explanation above, if the high-powered device with the right wavelength is 30 times more powerful than the MedcoVet device, then it should penetrate 50% deeper. ​The reason this is not true is because high-powered devices must continually be moved to ensure that the patient’s skin/fur is not burned.​ Without contact against the skin, much of the light output is reflected or absorbed in the fur. Per Hode (and cited research by Al Watban):

  3. One additional point: PBM is a cumulative modality, meaning multiple treatments (assuming that the treatment is in the effective range) lead to better outcomes.

    Laser Therapy in Veterinary Medicine - Riegel and Godbold (p105)

    Laser Therapy in Veterinary Medicine - Riegel and Godbold (p105)
    The advantage of a home PBM system is that the pet owner can treat daily or even multiple times per day and that the time per patient (since they are only treating one patient) can be a little bit longer. Since the pet owner is treating their pet in a comfortable environment and is not as time-constrained per session, we recommend slightly longer treatment times (10-15 minutes), multiple times per week. Research shows that more frequent treatments result in better outcomes.

In summary, the key points we raised in this white paper are:

  1. Class has to do with eye safety and one should not assume that lower class automatically means lower power.

  2. The key factors in penetration are wavelength and contact/pressure. Light reflection from skin and fur reduces the light that reaches the target tissue.

  3. Home and clinical PBM are different in that at home, multiple weekly treatments are possible and the time allotted to treatment can be more relaxed, resulting in positive outcomes.

Please share any feedback on report errors in this white paper to support@medcovet.com.​

Did this answer your question?