when does an eyeglass rx expire?

[NJEyeGuy]

You can't really hold back much, as the law requires not even 1 but 2 copies be given to each patient. I do agree with the fact that patient flow often prevents the doctor from waiting there until the patient pays for their exam. As for feeling uncomfortable just make sure you have the patient sign an "against advice" for the exam and make the glasses.

For the contacts I wouldn't hesitate to mention the FDA's recommendation of 1 year but in NJ there needs to be more than an "I didn't feel like it was a good idea" to cut the expiration. However, like I said you can make a business decision not to fill the prescription after 1 year if it makes you uncomfortable. I agree there should be a better standard to protect stupid people from themselves but until the law changes to back your decision you still have to give them 2 years.

[LandLord]

As I noted in post 44 if it has an expiration you can't use rx but can neutralize and you should write some where on patients info you neutralized glasses!

What if the Rx is expired and the patient has their old glasses with them? Can I copy the glasses if I don't peek at the Rx?

[regional_manager]

What if the Rx is expired and the patient has their old glasses with them? Can I copy the glasses if I don't peek at the Rx?

Yep, that's why I don't get how an eyeglass rx can expire. I feel like it would be better to go off of the written rx instead of a neutralization. Just my opinion.

[Judy Canty]

Not every state allows duplication of eyeglasses. You need to check with your state regulations, if applicable.

[thedjc01]

No one really cares what they do in Canada here in the United States. Opticians are now doing eye exams in Canada instead of optometrists, right?

[thedjc01]

I think it also depends on the state that you are in. In north Carolina we make scripts expire after 1 year. It is really the doctors discretion.

[Wes]

They're doing refractions, not exams. There's a difference.

[Barry Santini]

Today, my partner, in an extremely inciteful (!) piece of original thinking, put this whole expired Rx/duplicate thingy in proper perspective:

Said he: "If a person's glasses are broken, and the Rx connected to them has surpassed its expiration date, and I know that others say we shouldn't duplicate them...but...should we repair them....or not?"

Which, he asks, would be more consistent with our duty to protect people's health? Which would be more consistent with those who say "No!" to using an expired Rx?

Me? "Expired Rx, my ***!" One of the all-time, biggest waste-of time and mental effort discussion points I can imagine in eyewear. Really really just plain silly.

B

[chip anderson]

Senario for expiration: Patient has one pair of glasses, many years old, broken. Rx is + or - 8 diopters. His eye doctor can't see him for 6 weeks (not unusual among OMD's around here). Now do you make him a new a new pair of glasses, now in his old Rx. Or do you start with a diatribe: "The law says ....."

Chip

[Judy Canty]

Senario for expiration: Patient has one pair of glasses, many years old, broken. Rx is + or - 8 diopters. His eye doctor can't see him for 6 weeks (not unusual among OMD's around here). Now do you make him a new a new pair of glasses, now in his old Rx. Or do you start with a diatribe: "The law says ....."

Chip

And once again, negating his impetuous for seeing his eye doctor. With that logic, he'll never need an eye exam.

[braheem24]

Senario for expiration: Patient has one pair of glasses, many years old, broken. Rx is + or - 8 diopters. His eye doctor can't see him for 6 weeks (not unusual among OMD's around here). Now do you make him a new a new pair of glasses, now in his old Rx. Or do you start with a diatribe: "The law says ....."

Chip

Go to Lenscrafters, Eyemasters, Visionworks, Wal-mart, Sears, JC penneys, Heck walk into any mall and get a walk in refraction from a business that's ready to take business from all of the ill-prepared independents.

[Barry Santini]

And once again, negating his impetuous for seeing his eye doctor. With that logic, he'll never need an eye exam.

And if the person in the above scenario happens to be an emmetrope, with no Rx eyewear, just what is their impetus to see an eye doctor or need aneye exam? Shall we now regulate OTCs, to protect these people's eyehealth? Further with this reasoning, sunwear?

B

[Judy Canty]

That's the most ridiculous argument yet. Where is the urgency in replacing non-rx eyewear? BTW, yes I do believe that OTC readers should be regulated, if not outlawed altogether.

Let's keep the discussion on an "apples to apples" basis. No "red herrigs", please.

[Barry Santini]

That's the most ridiculous argument yet. Where is the urgency in replacing non-rx eyewear? BTW, yes I do believe that OTC readers should be regulated, if not outlawed altogether.

Let's keep the discussion on an "apples to apples" basis. No "red herrigs", please.

Well that's my point. Without prescription eyewear, non-wearer's aren't being subjected to what I feel is an arbitrary condition to *mandate* have an eyexam to ensure/ protect their eye health through a gatekeeping function such as eyewear Rx expiration. The point is that whether or NOT they have an Rx, I'm not sure why vision health should have a lawful protective/prophylactic mandate tied to fulfillment of a low risk item (eyewear has been declared as such by the FDA). I can't think of any other related aspect of healthcare that similarly does. Help me, I'm listening.

I think we have too much tendency to confuse medical eye health with refractive clarity. Yes, they're related, but the use of Rx expirations is not consistent with eye health risk management for all individuals.

So either everyone has to get an eye exam every year or two, or logically, we should stop discriminating in favor of ammetropic eye health only.

B

[AustinEyewear]

We all read and see pts who have adapted to improper Rx and/or fitting's / measurements. The same thing could occur with an old Rx. A great example is when a pt is first prescribed for reading zones and does not "take" the Rx prescribed. The pts continues to age, continues to "get by" w/o taking their prescribed Rx until one day they just can't read, and now have difficulty adapting to a perfectly fitted progressive. What an injustice the pt has done to themselves for not taking their prescribed Rx. This is why Rx's should probably expire. An expired Rx prevents an unscrupulous eye glass vendor from never mentioning that maybe they should at least get a refraction, before the pt ends up adapting to something they should not adapt to. It is essentially a pt protection mechanism. It protects their eyes, and it protects their wallet from having to pay for lenses that don't work or at least don't work as well as they could.