I'm trying to discern the advantages of various state-of-the-art PALs for a "simpler" prescription. The script in question is +0.75 Sph with +1.50 Add (same both eyes, and no astig.). The client is 52 year old mild hyperope whose presbyopia has now advanced to the point where he is considering "full-time" glasses. He currently does not wear glasses at all for distance but has begun to notice a potential need there especially when tired at end of day. He works at a computer all day (at a slightly farther than average distance of 36") and is happy using +1.25 otc readers at his desk. He is interested in a set of glasses for "everything else". He is willing to pay the premium for high end lenses. He is an engineer who researches his buying decisions thoroughly. He has suggested that he may want Varilux S or Shamir Autograph III - in Trivex with Transitions and Crizal. He has even suggested that he may wish the seg height to be set slightly low so as to give him maximum peripheral clarity at distance.
He is shying away from traditional bifocals because he feels that having the intermediate range available could useful when these are the only glasses he has on him - and importantly, his wife is pushing for PALs because she feels that bifocals will make him look older.
My question concerns the advantage of these high-end lenses for this kind of prescription. With a mild +, no cyl., and both eyes the same, the advantages of free-form (as I understand it) may not apply. However, as a non-eyeglass-wearer for most of his life, I think he will need a wide channel to be happy. What lenses do you think are most suitable here?
Bookmarks