Yahoo! 360° - THE EYE POD

THE EYE POD Full Post View | List View

- all about my life as an Optometrist, Father, Guitarist & Aggie Sports Fan huntsvillevisioncenter.com

MY EYE POD: since yahoo360 is closing (never much liked it anyway) my new blog will be located at BLOGSPOT:

http://myeyepod.blogspot.com/

there's a new post starting today 06/02/09! see you there!

Tuesday June 2, 2009 - 02:58pm (CDT) Permanent Link | 0 Comments
Gas Permeable Photochromic Lens: people as me all the time: "wouldnt it be cool if there were transitions CONTACTS!!??

well i think i just found them on the internet:

http://www.gasperm.com/index.php?function=viewcategory&categoryid=5

they're gas permeables ("hard" contacts) which will turn some people off, but still intriguing. they're also true photochromics, meaning they're dark when they're exposed to UV and light when they're not, so like transitions glasses they're un-usable as a driving option (b/c your UV is blocked by your windsheild). if you read the description it looks like they're light green normally, then turn dark blue when exposed to UV.

i emailed them to see if they still offer this product. i'll post their reply if they give one

Friday May 29, 2009 - 10:17am (CDT) Permanent Link | 1 Comment
No-Line Bifocals? Or No-Line Trifocals?: patients tell our staff & doctors all the time: "i wear those no-line trifocals", or they'll ask: "are these glasses no-line bificals or no-line trifocals?" and the answer is...yes.

and no.

a "lineless" bifocal or trifocal is a misnomer. its a lay term that is perfectly fine to use, but can be confusing for patients b/c its not a very accurate description of how the lens works. a better name for that type of lens is is true name: PROGRESSIVE. a "progressive" lens has MULTIPLE distances, not just two (as in a bifocal) or 3 (trifocal). it "progressively" gets stronger reading power the further you look down in the lens. distance Rx is at the top, near Rx at the bottom, and there is "no-line", but rather a smooth, gradual transition between those Rx's as you move your eyes up and down in the lens. so actually progressives are neither lineless "bifocals" nor "trifocals", but rather MULTIFOCALS. for most conceivable distances between say 200 yards at the top of the len s and about 14 inches at the bottom, there is some spot in the lens that should give you good vision at that distance. thats the good news: multiple distances, multiple Rx's and multiple uses in 1 pair of glasses. sort of an "all-in-one" pair that has no lines, so you can "hide" from others the fact that you need bifocals, possibly helping to conceal your age if so desired.

but they have their downsides: the biggest one is that you have to sacrifice some optical quality in the periphery in order to gain the "lineless" transition. so if you look out of the "corner of your eye" (not through the middle of the lens), its blurry. some people are greatly bothered by this, others can adapt quickly. you wont know whether you can handle that type of blur until you just try it.

Tags: progressive, bifocal, trifocal

Tuesday May 19, 2009 - 09:26am (CDT) Permanent Link | 0 Comments
Ciba Dailies Aqua Comfort Plus: we've really had a lot of success with this product lately! very thin, very "wet", very comfortable, good visual quality, high compliance rate, super easy to take care of (there IS NO "care"), and not expensive.

http://www.dailies.com/

we're moving more and more patients into this modality because its safe for us to Rx (low incidence of infectious & inflammatory problems), easy for the patient to use, and very comfortable b/c of the low profile (thin & flexible).

we see a lot of GPC because we're in a college town SHSU that just happens to be located in East Texas, one of the worst places in the world to live if you have seasonal allergies because of our large pine forest, high humidity (mold) and heat. a lot of the time dailies are the only modality that an allergy-sufferer can wear.

Thursday May 7, 2009 - 01:12pm (CDT) Permanent Link | 0 Comments
Interesting Eye Fact: i get a weekly email called the AOA "First Look". its a kind of quick summary/compilation of the week's eye industry news. i already deleted this week's, unfortunately, so i cant reference it.

but there was an interesting factoid in there this week: 11% of Americans went for a "routine" (i.e. not-sick) medical check-up in 2006. 44% went for a "routine" eye exam. thats a big discrepancy! so why the big difference? some things to think about:

1) progressive myopia and progressive presbyopia: a lot of juveniles are getting more nearsighted, and a lot of presbyopes are getting increasingly presbyopic. so those 2 population groups are coming in for new glasses/contacts b/c the old ones aint doin' it for them anymore. the variable factor and the motivation for the visit is BLUR. most types of blur are not considered to be acute or emergent. whereas if you had PAIN or malaise you'd go in to your primary care physician or pediatrician, but the visit would not be deemed "routine". if you have blur and you go in for an eye exam, it usually *is* considered "routine".

2) Rx restrictions: so you wear contacts and you want to buy some more. but the OD isnt going to sell you any more until/unless you have an annual eye exam. contacts are a medical device, so even if your Rx hasnt "changed", someone still needs to be monitoring your corneal health if you're a contact lens wearer. the motivating factor here is NEED MORE CONTACTS. same with glasses...if your glasses break or get lost and your Rx is over a year old, no one will sell you glasses w/o an exam.

3) "eye" insurance or vision plans: most vision plans will pay for an annual eye examination, but they WILL NOT pay for an emergent or urgent visit. so if a person comes in for an urgent problem, sometimes they use up their "routine eye exam" benefit on said visit...so it statistically gets called "routine", even if its really not.

i'm sure there are more. initially when i read the numbers (11% vs 44%) it was eye-opening, but upon further review and consideration, now it just seems to me to be "routine".

Friday May 1, 2009 - 10:17am (CDT) Permanent Link | 0 Comments