Blurred in distance view

[IanC57]

I have a problem with Panamic lens where they function well in all areas except in the distance view where it is slightly blurred. It is a poly lens Crizal "D".

The same customer has purchased single vision lenses with the same spec for distance and the single vision function perfectly.

This is the third set of Panamic lenses for this customer with no similar problems with previous lenses. This is the first set in poly (and rimless), however.

What could be wrong?

[Angelo Rojas]

Ian, just drop the fitting hight, two m.m. will be enough, your customer is looking through some portion of the intermedium segment. Face shape the frame, panto tilt ?... try, good luck.

[IanC57]

This was tried and in fact the issue is broadly based in the upper part of the lense where I would expect more flexibility and a broader range of view for distance. Anywhere in the top third of the lense has the same problem.

[EyeFitWell]

If it checks out nicely on the lensometer, it sounds like time for a Dr. Check. Either the lenses are wrong or the Rx is wrong.

[Ory]

Are the SV lenses in poly as well? I'm surprised that there are 2 responses and no one has blamed it on the poly yet!

A Dr's check is a waste of time. If the SV dist lenses are great but the PAL isn't, why would you think the doctor can change anything?

[Chris Ryser]

This is the third set of Panamic lenses for this customer with no similar problems with previous lenses. This is the first set in poly (and rimless), however.

What could be wrong?

If it is the third set of lenses, I would assume that the add has increased by anywhere from 1.25 to 1.75 over the first pair.

You have a heavily reduced width of the progressive channel and much increased parts of distortion, Your patient has arrived at the stage where the distortion is bothering.

If they have been fitted right on the dot, customer might not want or can not get used to them.

[IanC57]

The PAL has been check with a lensometer and is consistent with the SV lens (plastic). A second DR. check on the Rx shows it is good and it is verified by the success with the SV.

Previous two plastic PAL Panamics have worked well for distance in the past without blurring. Patient sees distance better with glasses off.

Peripheral vision is as good with new poly's as with previous plastics. Poly index is slightly higher than with previous plastics.

Reading, meeting room, and other typicall uses are excellent with the PAL lens. Driving is the primary activity where the blurred distance shows strongly.

[chip anderson]

1)Check head position while driving car. Some folks, especially very short ones elevate chin to a rediculous degree. Also check seg. ht.
2) Make glasses with ST28.
3) Tell patient to drive with SV glassess.

[Robert Martellaro]

I would assume that the add has increased by anywhere from 1.25 to 1.75 over the first pair.

If true, then a change to a PAL (Gradal Top, Genesis, and ECP) that has a generous distance zone may be helpful.

Regards,

[suwit]

if you have done all that thing and still have any problem.

change lens to Vx Physio because Physio proved that problem from Vx Panamic
with the new Wave Front Technology !!

Regards
:D

[MarcE]

If it checks out nicely on the lensometer and matches the SV lenses I think you are down to two things (other than driving with nose up in the air). Vertex distance and BC. Maybe the BC is different on the new lenses. I Think (I don't know) that I have seen progressives made on the wrong BC before.
Different specs may = different vertex distance. Persons who are used to seeing 20/15 in distance can tell the difference. Move them closer to the eye.

[Bobie]

Panamic is dynamic & comfortable of vision PALs and the quality of vision is the most poor point of Panamic even for Panamic Orma ABBE 58.

Panamic Airwear ABBE 32 ( 29 - 32 ) will be much more poor quality of vision if compare with SV.

:finger:

[kdog2020]

I have seen both issues mentioned above, drivers who raise their chin and patients who do not tolorate poly (even in low Rxs).

A change in fitting height and/or material change may help. We have moved towards recommending trivex or 1.6 to many patients.

[Bobie]

I agree with kdog2020 , cheer :cheers:

Trivex ABBE 43 vs 1.6/42 MR-20 ABBE 42 vs 1.61 MR-8 ABBE 41!

I like 1.6/42 MR-20 ABBE 42 because the AR coated is much better for over 2 years.

I am not understand that , why Essilor still use Ormil 1.6 ABBE 36 that not good enough for rimless frame.

Please ,inform me for Essilor Stylis 1.67 is MR-7 or MR-10. :cheers: