Reducing Minus Power for Computer Use

[brucekrymow]

I wear contacts, -9.00 D sph each eye.

Sitting in front of a 17" computer monitor all day, I end up w/ headaches by day's end.

I am 24" away from the monitor. I do not want or need progressives or near variables. I need -9.00 for distant, not 24".

If I were to wear straight SV plus lenses, what power do I need to see 24" away effectively without optic nerve/eye strain/fatigue?

For a high-minus contact lens wearer like myself, is there an industry formula whereby adding a plus power to my Rx via spectacles can reduce the minus to something more reasonable for this 24" distance?

[chip anderson]

How old are you? Probably +1.25 will work at any age , but really shouldn't be needed unless you are at least approaching 40.
If you are over 40 you might as well start concidering multifocal contacts as it's coming whether you want it to or not.

Chip

[Yeap]

Agree with Chip, if you are not approaching 40 you shouldn't feel any problem for 24". how is your accommodation level? sometime you may just need some simple eye exercise to overcome that. without further investigation i don't see the necessity to under-correct for VDU purpose.

[DragonLensmanWV]

Get you a pair of readers to tide you over, eventually you'll need progressives or other near focus aids. Doesn't matter if you want them, you will need them.
Or you can go monovision, Never figured out how people actually get used to that.

[icare]

I wear contacts, -9.00 D sph each eye.

Sitting in front of a 17" computer monitor all day, I end up w/ headaches by day's end.

I am 24" away from the monitor. I do not want or need progressives or near variables. I need -9.00 for distant, not 24".

If I were to wear straight SV plus lenses, what power do I need to see 24" away effectively without optic nerve/eye strain/fatigue?

For a high-minus contact lens wearer like myself, is there an industry formula whereby adding a plus power to my Rx via spectacles can reduce the minus to something more reasonable for this 24" distance?

You should get an exam. There are just too many variables in your situation to accept a casual recommendation.

Honestly, I thought that this thread would get locked in light of the posting guidelines.

[chip anderson]

Another small possiblity is that you have some astigmatism left even though you have your spherical contacts on, which many practioners will fail to correct for reasons we won't go into here.
It's quite possible if you could get an eye doctor to refract you with your contact lenses on your eye, it's quite possible this could be corrected. Either in in another type of contact or in the forward lenses and relieve whatever fatigue you are experiences.
In fact if: You aren't over corrected (contacts too strong) and are under 40 this is far more likely than the need for readers.

Chip

[Jeffrey Kiener OD]

All good suggestions, especially the one where you enlist the help of your eye care professional who's treatment you are under.

Your problem is not uncommon!

[brucekrymow]

I'm 43 and an emerging presbyope and understand that this is coming like it or not :shiner:

But I have no problems other than sitting in front of a computer all day, 24" from my schnozz.

My company writes calculation software used worldwide, but this scenario is not part of the equation.

I have gone to at least 3 different optometrists - would you believe one showed up to the exam half-drunk? They all have had different "results", none of them effective and most trying to push me into progressives. I will eventually, probably, but am not ready now. For now I just want glasses only for work at my desk where I spend more than a third of my life. :p

I know I don't need -9.00 for 24" distant.

I'm wearing +1.25 readers currently as I write this, but do not know if it is the correct power, hence the basis of my question. Theoretically I am at -7.75 (-9.00 + +1.25): is this too much still? Too little? Just right?

[finefocus]

If you must wear readers, choose them based on working distance. Try on a pair of +3.00's. Notice that they will work, but only if you sit way too close to the monitor. Back off the power until you get the working distance you want - then back off another quarter. By the way, check the OC placement in them, you do not want even a hint of base out prism. But really, instead of glasses, get an egg-timer, set it to 10 minutes. When it dings, look off to infinity for a 10-count. You may have the dreaded "resting-point-of-accomodation-jerkback" syndrome.

[chip anderson]

Did any of the doctors refract you with your contact lenses on?

[brucekrymow]

Hi, Chris ~

No - they all refuse to refract w/ contacts in, citing unnamed policy/regulation.

[chip anderson]

Find one that will, think you will find your problem will be diagnosed.
Dr's who won't are just being plain damn lazy.

Chip

[brucekrymow]

That gets VERY expensive & time consuming - any recommendations in Phoenix?

[chip anderson]

Yeah get out of Phoenix. I went to one CLSA convention there. Coughed so bad that everyone kept looking to back of the room to see if they could watch me die of consumption. Coughed for two months after I got home. The Airport Luggage people stole my very expensive at the time video camera.
Why would anyone live in the dessert anyway. Where do you fish, for Heaven's sake?
However back to the orgional question, let your fingers do the walking, I'm sure Phoenix has lots of OD's and OMD's. Just tell them up front what you want when you make the appointment. If they don't do it, don't pay them.

Chip

[brucekrymow]

You're funny, Chip! :)

There are some decent places to fish here, believe it or not, You know AZ has the highest number of boat owners & scuba divers, per capita, than any other state? Weird for the desert.

Finding a decent OD is the Holy Grail here - I guess I'll keep at it for another 6 years.

[TLG]

You know AZ has the highest number of boat owners...per capita

No way. That would be Minnesota. Go Twins!!

[944mo]

Hey Bruce,
How is it down there in the desert? :hammer:
I just had to say hi because it was you. Is Dave still wearing his?
I can get you a frame still if you need one.
Take care and good luck.
Mike O.

[Robert Martellaro]

You should get an exam. There are just too many variables in your situation to accept a casual recommendation.

All good suggestions, especially the one where you enlist the help of your eye care professional who's treatment you are under.

Right. See an eye professional. In the U.S. that's an optometrist or ophthalmologist. Preferably an OD. Older the better.

Hi, Chris ~

No - they all refuse to refract w/ contacts in, citing unnamed policy/regulation.

They can't all be doing it wrong. Probably a misunderstanding. Insist on an overrefraction in addition to the spectacle refraction.

[OHPNTZ]

Another small possiblity is that you have some astigmatism left even though you have your spherical contacts on, which many practioners will fail to correct for reasons we won't go into here.
It's quite possible if you could get an eye doctor to refract you with your contact lenses on your eye, it's quite possible this could be corrected. Either in in another type of contact or in the forward lenses and relieve whatever fatigue you are experiences.
In fact if: You aren't over corrected (contacts too strong) and are under 40 this is far more likely than the need for readers.

Chip

I would place my bets that he is probably at an in between power with contacts. As many of you know, over 6.00 D and you're in half steps in power. Maybe he needs a vertex corrected of -8.75 and also does have some cyl, and recieved the spherical equivalent...you could easily add up to an extra 0.50 to 0.75 D with the combination of these two...

Then he doesn't want a spectacle add...so your best bet is a low power multifocal contact lens, or the cooper visions EP (if the sphere power goes up that high).

Even if he has some cyl (up to about -.75), and it's not against the rule, at such a high minus power he should be ok...plus his lens choices diminish over -6 as well...

[chip anderson]

All of which could be discovered with a refraction over the contacts, doc.
There are high power contacts available in 1/4 steps. There are low cylinder contacts and there are rigid lenses available in .12 diopter steps.
So, fraid there is really no excuses for sloppy contact lens fitting or sloppy refractions or sloppy eye exams.
One should fit the patient, not the nomogram, or the fitting chart, or the availablility chart. Or even what the little girl in the mini-skirt is pushing or giving away in trials.

Chip

[varmint]

I know quite a few of the OD's here in Phx, PM sent.

I have this really nice video camera for sale a friend of mine who works at luggage at the airport gave me a few years ago.

[fjpod]

Ah, here we go again, optometrists are either drunk, lazy or sloppy. Some will never tire.

[OHPNTZ]

All of which could be discovered with a refraction over the contacts, doc.
There are high power contacts available in 1/4 steps. There are low cylinder contacts and there are rigid lenses available in .12 diopter steps.
So, fraid there is really no excuses for sloppy contact lens fitting or sloppy refractions or sloppy eye exams.
One should fit the patient, not the nomogram, or the fitting chart, or the availablility chart. Or even what the little girl in the mini-skirt is pushing or giving away in trials.

Chip

Chip,

What CL's would you recommend in high power with 1/4 steps? How well do those lenses perform with sustained computer use without drying out? I'd bet not well...

I'm well aware of RGP's...but it sounds like this guy is already in soft lenses. He hasn't given us his age, or his spec rx...which would end the debate quickly.

So I'm not sure of the "sloppy theory", but I'm sure your over refractions are precise. Do you over-refract to 0.12 of a Diopter on a high minus???

Judging from your previous posts, I know you don't to topography...so I think you may be a little sloppy in your approach.

And for your "sloppy eye exams"...we won't even go there.

[Spexvet]

Why are you guys answering this?

[chip anderson]

Spex:
If a patient comes to you and asks for a refraction over contacts (which should be routine anyway as things have a way of not working out exactly from routine exams and "fitting" from a chart and observation) especially in high corrections. Would you refract over the CL? Would you refuse to do so?
We all know if the spectacle Rx calls for X amount of cylinder that is not exactly what's going to be residual exactly with the CL on. Chances are no one took a vertex on this patient so it had to be aproximated (another source of error). Further the may never have been observed with the contacts on the eye for any reason after having been "fitted" for them by emperical measurements.
So what's the big problem with seeing a patient with a problem at follow up, or a specific usage question with refracting over the contact? Why is failure to do so when the patient specificly request this, not sloppy medicine, or sloppy optometry?
In many states the supplier (fitter) of contacts is required to tell the patient to return to the prescriber for a follow-up. Just what happens and what use is the follow-up if acuity isn't checked and refined if needed?

Chip