Computer Use Progressive for -6.00 (need help)

[Pete Hanlin]

We have a patient who wants a progressive for computer use... Problem is, they have a -6.00 -1.50 x180 Rx and the Technica and Access only go down to a 4 base. Any ideas on something we could use for a computer application?

Thanks!

Pete

[Darris Chambless]

Pete,

The Visuality comes in a 1.75D and there is the Outlook with 1.50D, 3.50D. Other than that I don't know what to suggest to you.

Hope this helps a little.

Darris C.

[Jeff Trail]

Pete,

Other than the Shamir Office (did you try that one yet?) but I think it's a 5/7 base...but might want to double check. Another option you might try is to go with something like the Kodak Concise it's a really shallow PAL and make power changes accordingly... The Younger 10/30 used to work great for these but was discontinued. Another option if you can find any out there that was discontinued was the Varilux overview.

I know I have used the Concise and made some ocupational PAL's that worked fine.. it's available in Sunsensor, CR39 and 1.56 evoclear.
I have tinkered with the AO compact but it didn't work as well as the concise.. you just have to give up any distant at all and be satisfied with intermediate and reading only if you want to "make your own"

Oh and one other thing I did with the Concise was actually cut if "off axis" a few degree's and rotated the reading in for less conversion.. Since you more or less are not following the use it was designed for rotating the channel really didn't hurt.

Maybe someone will come up with a better plan..hope so I wouldn't mind find a better way of going with those moderate to high myops and have a design actually made for them.

Jeff "Well? any other bright idea's guys" Trail

[shanbaum]

One method that's worked for me - I wear roughly -8.00 -1.50 with a 2.00 add OU. For computer/desk use, I put half the add in the distance - e.g., -7.00 -1.50 with a 1.00 add.

Works great to about 5 feet or so; very comfortable for near work.

[Cindy Hamlin]

Pete,
I have had several patients I have done what Shanbaum has said for and it worked wonderfully.

The outlook which Jeff mentioned is a wonderful new lens for computer users. We have had them fit with great success and results.

~Cindy

[harry a saake]

Pete, i also were outlook and have for several years with no problems, and i use a computer at work, and again at home here every night. Other nice thing about outlook is you also can make it up four ways, clear, ar, transition quantam and polarized. This is one lens that works best fit as high as you can, some face wrap and pano tilt.

[Refractingoptician.com]

'''

[Pete Hanlin]

Thanks all for the good suggestions,

Last night I had to make a decision on this job, and I pretty much had come to the conclusion a lot of you suggested (I just took half the add power from the top of a standard progressive and then put half the add power into the reading). This was after conversing with the patient and finding that the distance vision was not of great concern anyway...

I'll let you know how this works out!

Pete

[Darris Chambless]

Hello Gary,

With all due respect your suggestion is not unlike recommending a sand rake when a spade shovel is what is needed. Although a ft 28 can work to an extent with the propper intermidiate at the top it won't do what the variable add lenses will do for the patient. Most of our patients use the computer design lenses because of the varying distances they must see while at their desk. Unfortunately the lined bifocals don't give the patients the same accomodative ranges. A lined bifocal will onlt give them18 to 20 in the BF and 24-30 in the intermediate.

Granted you can set the range at any distance you want but you still only have two focuses. For the computer users the variable focus lenses are a far better product and work very well. If you've not tried them you really should give them a looksee. If you need any help in how to use them or fit them let us know and we will be happy to help.

Take care,

Darris C.

[harry a saake]

Gary, tell us what your thoughts are, as to why you would say its better, and also why would you let any patient out the door without them knowing what to expect as to price?

[Texas Ranger]

Pete, I'm with Robert S. on this and that seems to be the choice you made. Also, I had a lady the other day that is a graphic artist with a neck problem; loves her panamics for everything, she a
-5.25-50x90 w/ a 2.00 add; we made her some single vision computer glasses, put a -4.00-50x90, used a half shape, mounted into a 3 piece mount, so that the lenses sit up higher than normal, she can see the near stuff UNDER the lens; she was really thrilled with them! we do about two jobs a day like what you're doing with your patient. really save on the neck!

[Jeff Trail]

Not to make it seem like "take sides" ring th bell and come out swinging! :-) BUT I have done it Gary's way as well as all the others mentioned...including an ED and FD..I try to take into account the needs of the wearer.. if they need a WIDE visual area and not keeping moving their head than a "hard" seg might be an option.. OH and I have done it with a smart seg for those who need that little xtra area's of focal length. :-)

I found that some types of engineers, draftsmen, surveyers, people who paint cars, people with odd ball hobbies, seem to like Gary way better, less head movement and being able to use full field range in the intermediate.

For people using a computer our suggestions worked great and since Pete wanted to know about a problem in that area it probably wasn't the best suggestion BUT remember guys how many people read these threads that DO NOT contribute but might catch a bit of new information... Maybe Gary has other reasons but I just thought I might post when I used Gary "answer"..

One last thing, we might be forgetting their are SOME people who just can't tolerate a PAL so having and understanding and KNOWING other options is not such a "bad" thing.
Gary, take it with a grain of salt and remember that when people post it is not like writting and the "feelings" and "expressions" do not translate. I don't think anyone was "bashing" you for your contribution.. but around this board people like to really jump quick..believe me I know :-) and one of the first things is "why would you say that?" ..some of us are used to the rough and tumble way this board works at times and as one who really loves a good debate hopes it continues to be that way around here.

Jeff "whoever thought I would defend someone?" Trail

P.S. PLEASE be a democrat, I need someone on my side on this board when it comes to politics!! :-)

[Jerry Thornhill]

Try the Desk Top from Sierra. Surprised Karen didn't suggest this one. It has a 2.00BC available. Same design as the Shamir Office.

Jerry

[Cindy Hamlin]

Originally posted by Gary
Make the patient a pair of computer glasses using FT 28. Tell them to try these out for two weeks at no charge ,then if they like them ... tell them the price.

Your risk is low and you will be providing them with a better product.

Read the last sentence! Gary meant to let them use the FT28 and then they will realize the progressive is the way to go! Not that a FT28 is superior to a Progressive for computer use!

I have used his trick several times when I knew better and it worked every time!

~Cindy

[Pete Hanlin]

Since we have wandered into the non-PAL side of intermediate/near use lenses, I'll just throw in that I've used intermediate/near executives with great success with patients who read blueprints (like my dad used to in his job as an estimator).

In my opinion, the biggest advantage of the E-line (other than the wide near area) is the positioning of the optical center right at the line. I think this presents less of a problem to patients who have to transition between near and intermediate often.

Pete

[Darris Chambless]

ROFLMAO :)

After reading some of the "defnding" going on in this string I started laughing so hard I nearly wet myself :) Some of you really need to learn to lighten up a little bit. While your actions may seem admirable they are unnecessary and create the very problems you're trying to defend against.

Gary may have meant what Cindy suggested, but I'm afraid I don't read minds only written script not to metion I meant no malice in my response to him. I do fear; however, that now after all the rush to "defend" Gary (unnecessarily I might add) he may feel a bit threatened by me. So...

Gary,

If you do feel as though I've jumped in to throttle you, I sincerely apologize if those that came to your defense have made you feel that way. I meant no malice.

Sincerely,

Darris C.

In the event that no one has noticed, Pete is a pretty smart cookie. I'm sure he's competent and capable of making lens choices for his patients and knows what would work best for their needs. Pete did get some really good suggestions, but his question was what other computer lenses (Technica and Access specifically) came in a BC lower than 4? I thought that was pretty straight forward, but I could be wrong.

Take care everyone,

Darris C.

[Judy Canty]

[P.S. PLEASE be a democrat, I need someone on my side on this board when it comes to politics!! :-) [/B][/QUOTE]

Jeff, I've always been on your side!
Judy "yellow-dog Democrat and proud of it!" Canty

[Darris Chambless]

Hello Judy,

I've always admired your convictions when it comes to politics, but we like you anyway :) You too Jeff.

Darris "True Blue Conservative through and through" C.

Remember that "C." is the abreviation for Conservative. ;)

[Jeff Trail]

Judy,

Nice to see I'm not the only one around here!.. Some of those debates when the election "problems" came up I was in the minority.
Now that I have one other on my side..we'll kick @#$ !! Atleast now when Darris and Pete and the rest circle the wagons someone has my back :-)

Darris,

I don't think we were "jumping" to defend Gary, or I know that I wasn't looking to make it a "us vs. them" posting more so I wanted to try to throw out there some options when it does work and when you should consider other ways to meet the wearers needs.. Not really for yours or Pete's sake but more for some of the ones who are "lurkers" and may not have the knowledge of a few of you opticl veterans. I am surprised at times the "number" of readers of some of these threads compared to the low amount of actual responses... I hope some people are atleast gaining something from some of our diatribes and rantings (at times) ROFL to use Darris response :-)

Pete,

I know that the ole e-line trick, but after a while I found they even liked getting and FD or ED even more...makes the math a little more confusing but I had plenty of draftsmen over the years who loved it :-)


Jeff" knocking out plenty of responses in one short sweet posting" Trail

[price]

Pete I agree with jerry on the desk top. At my optical we do about five to eight a week. My patients love the four to six feet distance ,reading and intermidate area. I have put this type of lens on an RX -8.50 -4.00 X 90 ADD 2.50. Most work for Dell computer co. or motorola here in AUSTIN TX.

If you get another patient give it a try . It much like a progressive. Your patient will tell others.



Don Price A B O C.