Lenscrafters new Accufit system.

**YourEyesOpt** · 01-08-2012, 01:44 AM

Scared of what?
The original posting asked what current LensCrafters Opticians think of the Accufit System.... I posted.

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 01:54 AM

something new

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 02:03 AM

you dont need a spaceship to get this correct
ok

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 02:10 AM

technology

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 02:14 AM

all we gotta do is still be human
and they will keep coming back

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 02:15 AM

i hope

**markallen** · 01-08-2012, 02:32 AM

no hard feelings
just kidding around
take care
best of luck to everybody

**rdcoach5** · 01-08-2012, 09:45 AM

Until this thread was hijacked, it was pretty enlightening, especially Uncle Fester's link to Lens Shafters bottom line. As those of us who have taken monocular PDs for decades know, or should know, the most accurate way to take is by using a marking pen on demo lenses and then double-checking with a penlight to see that each mark is dead center at the pupil. I do use a pupillometer for people whose eyes tend to not track together. I have found that, while our pupillometer's total PD is dead-on with my measure, it's monocular result is often wrong. For example, a reading of Right 31 and left 32.5 is often just the reverse and I have documented this tediously by using a marking pen and penlight as described above. i attribute this to the patients brow or bridge being not quite uniform. I don't know about Lens Shafters new Grolman device but it's easy to imagine a slight mis-alignment of the frame or device to give skewed readings. And what do they care, they're just making a sale ?

I forgot to mention that the frame has to adjusted so it is not skewed to start with or your spots are also wrong.

**Barry Santini** · 01-08-2012, 01:27 PM

Pupilometer Mono PD WRONG???!!! By what measure. rdcoach, you desire to locate the geometric center of the pupil. Lens designers, however, want to locate the intersection of the visual axis with the cornea, which, using surface apex of the cornea, is reasonably close to the corneal reflex (which is co-linear with the gullstrand anterior nodal point.

Discussion.

B

**rdcoach5** · 01-08-2012, 01:46 PM

Originally Posted by Barry Santini

Pupilometer Mono PD WRONG???!!! By what measure. rdcoach, you desire to locate the geometric center of the pupil. Lens designers, however, want to locate the intersection of the visual axis with the cornea, which, using surface apex of the cornea, is reasonably close to the corneal reflex (which is co-linear with the gullstrand anterior nodal point.

Discussion.

B

Barry you are quite right i do not measure the geometric center of the pupil but the center of the visual axis by using a penlight.
As I said, I use a penlight to illuminate the center and measure manually by marking with a felt tip pen on demos and double-checking to see that my mark does indeed line up with the illuminated reflection. I point the penlight just above my dominant left eye for each eye and move over to be in front of each eye. The corneal reflex is indeed illuminated by the penlight and is not necessarily the geometric center. Grab a penlight and you will see.

**Judy Canty** · 01-08-2012, 02:04 PM

Originally Posted by markallen

you dont need a spaceship to get this correct
ok

But you might need a rocket surgeon.

**edKENdance** · 01-24-2012, 05:55 PM

Just had a client in. Eyes tested here but got his glasses at Lenscrafters using the new system. His right PD was 7mm off. LOL!

**Barry Santini** · 01-24-2012, 06:18 PM

I call this the Three Mile Island effect. Ya gotta know that the pumps arent working, even though the switch was thrown

**Wes** · 01-24-2012, 06:24 PM

Do you know whether it was an ordering/measurement error, or a manufacturing error (aside from the obvious dispensing error)?

**chip anderson** · 01-24-2012, 06:27 PM

Lenscrafters "system" is probably of more benefit to thier advertising system. Do you really think Pupillary reflex measurements in 1/100ths of a mm matters a hill of beans? In an space telescope maybe, but in spectacles?
I for one, don't think measureing a Pupillary reflex through a demo and then measureing the spotted areas is near as accurate as what can be done by the experienced optician with either a ruler or a pupillary reflex devise.

Chip

**RIMLESS** · 01-24-2012, 06:54 PM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Lenscrafters "system" is probably of more benefit to thier advertising system.
Chip

It is what it is, but you gotta give it to them in the respect that they do know how to market the crap out of things. Perception is often reality and for the most part the public at large are like a herd of mindless sheep. Jeeze la weese, remember the caliper gizzmo to measure the patients head.

**edKENdance** · 01-24-2012, 07:00 PM

Originally Posted by Wes

Do you know whether it was an ordering/measurement error, or a manufacturing error (aside from the obvious dispensing error)?

Should have been a stock SV lens. Doubt it was a problem with lay-out. Can't see how it could be anything other than an ordering error. Who ever dispensed them should have known they were wrong just by looking at the guy.

**Matthew** · 01-24-2012, 08:43 PM

Snake oil

**Wes** · 01-24-2012, 10:40 PM

Originally Posted by edKENdance

Who ever dispensed them should have known they were wrong just by looking at the guy.

I don't know how many times I've thought this...

**Robert Martellaro** · 01-25-2012, 12:47 AM

Originally Posted by rdcoach5

As those of us who have taken monocular PDs for decades know, or should know, the most accurate way to take is by using a marking pen on demo lenses and then double-checking with a penlight to see that each mark is dead center at the pupil.

If my mom lived near "not here", I'd send her there to have you fit her eyeglasses.

**optilady1** · 01-25-2012, 09:37 AM

Originally Posted by chip anderson

Lenscrafters "system" is probably of more benefit to thier advertising system. Do you really think Pupillary reflex measurements in 1/100ths of a mm matters a hill of beans? In an space telescope maybe, but in spectacles?
I for one, don't think measureing a Pupillary reflex through a demo and then measureing the spotted areas is near as accurate as what can be done by the experienced optician with either a ruler or a pupillary reflex devise.

Chip

Even if there was any benefit to being so accurate, the lab takes those numbers and rounds them up or down because how could you block up something to 1/100th mm?

I wonder who's gonna take the hit when they realize that this snazzy new system isn't gonna win them any new patients because the people dispensing and selling the glasses are the major problem. I don't think there are too many people left to fire.

**Robert Martellaro** · 01-25-2012, 01:40 PM

Some words of wisdom per Mo Jalie.

Rule of Sixteenths- For every 1mm diference between the PD of the fitter and the subject, the fitter will over-estimate
the subject's PD by 1/16 mm if the fitters PD is larger than that of the subject.

Monocular PDs are of no use without reference to the frame.

**William Walker** · 01-26-2012, 10:05 PM

I have to say that the Accufit system has some great benefits compared to standard practice.

Of course, the person using it needs to be trained, and of course the person using it has to have common sense. That's a given, and in any company in any industry there are always employees at the top end of the scale, and some.....at the other end. ;)

Two huge benefits I've seen in the Accufit system...
1) It automatically measures heighth for every order. Most optical orders in most shops (budget opticals, malls, and high end included) only measure heighth for SV in extreme RXs. I think this is a big improvement for those moderate to high power RXs who otherwise never had that specified.

2) When you put the tool on the frame for taking the picture, in cases of panto tilt (higher than lets say 11-12 degrees), it will not accept an image with the frame tilted down at a high panto tilt. 'What if that's the way we want it to sit?' you ask? (I'm so glad you did) :) By having the patient raise their chin up to an acceptable slight panto, it has effectively lowered the OC in the lens according to Minkwitz's Formula. How many opticals do that consistently with every order? I would have to say not many.

As an optician, I didn't think I would like it at first, but in all honesty, I am very glad to have it.

Feel free to ask if you have any questions.

William

**Barry Santini** · 01-26-2012, 10:09 PM

Please clarify point 2. In the Optikam system, from which this is derived, panto is panto..., independant of head posture.

B

**William Walker** · 01-26-2012, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by Barry Santini

Please clarify point 2. In the Optikam system, from which this is derived, panto is panto..., independant of head posture.
B

I'll try - it's hard for me (a visual person) to type it out, so forgive me if I can't convey it the way I would if we were in person...

(Barry knows the background stuff, but for anyone looking at the thread that might not...)
"at a typical vertex distance, which is about 27 mm from the center of the eye, one degree of rotation is roughly equal to 1/2 mm across the lens surface (27 mm * tan 1 = 0.5 mm). So, if you displace the optical center of the lens 1 mm for every 2 degrees of tilt, you can keep the axis passing through the center of rotation of the eye." (I'm quoting Darryl here because he can put it more concisely than I would).

With our tool on the frame, there is a tab at the top that points out (toward the camera), at a ~90 degree angle to the frame front. The camera system monitors how much of that tab is sown when the picture is taken and from that, knows how much panto tilt there is. If the frame is tilted down, the OC measured at eye level would be too high for the optical axis. When you ask the patient to raise their chin slightly, the angle of the frame becomes less panto (as observed by the camera), and the OC is lowered - exactly what we would do when adjusting for Martin's formula (earlier I typed too quickly and said Minkwitz).