Originally Posted by
MakeOptics
My philosophy on the topic comes from a management perspective, I chose a rule where no CR is allowed because the staff and their training as well as ability to explain concepts to a patients come from all over the place. I here all the time the following:
I have been an optician for XX years.
I have worked in XXXXX lab.
I have my ABO.
But I also see:
+8.00 and above in a large grooved rimless frame.
High minus frames decentered more than 10mm per eye.
etc.
The list coul dgo on in both the confidence in their ability as well as the severity in blunders. I could choose to constantly educate over and over on topics which I have done in the past. I can choose to make nomograms which give almost every conceivable scenario and what to do and what not to do which I have also done. I can chose to make a rule that encompasses the problem and the non-problems all under one simple rule. That's why I chose to make a rule about poly/trivex fro all semi rimless and for all rimless as well. Clients will pay the extra charges, this I know for a fact or they'll find another frame. Every now and again I get a staff member who will compute the ET in multiple meridians and even give me a specific ET or CT to order and then ask if we can do it in CR-39. Usually I say sure why not, but if you want an easier faster smoother experience just offer poly/trivex, if the patient complains you have an easy out, "it's the bosses rule". Often times it's the opticians grievance with not being able to make whatever decision they want.
Oh and BTW it's a low cost option is not a valid excuse for CR-39 in our office, we see many low vision patients and the entire staff understands that an eye is worth more then the upgrade to prevent chipping.
I kinda understood that it was more venting, but there is a reason why there is a rule and probably also a reason why she's got that big stick about this rule. I hope I conveyed the why in this post.
Bookmarks