Hi All,
Does anyone know what the industry average is for remakes? We do not have our own lab so I am only taking into account what mistakes our opticians can make as in wrong seg height or PD, wrong Rx entered, Dr. changed Rx, etc etc.
Any input would be welcomed.
I'd say 10%, if you include Dr. Changed RX
I think any 'industry average' will be of dubious use to you rj. I'd be willing to bet the distribution of remake percentages have two or even three big 'hills,' depending on what sort of optical you run & the product line you're offering, and then deviation could still be wide based on different labor and training strategies.
Kids in the big box will be throwing pizza parties if optician error remakes drop below 10%.
Higher-end outlets should be calling the consultant firms before that ever flirts with 10%.
Rigor in the record-keeping (and who you trust to track it) will have a powerful impact on how you observe the needle move. Once you have it firmly installed, though, I expect you'll see great strides no matter what the number turns out to be. Good on you, and good luck!
[edit: I was drafting this before Tallboy posted--wasn't trying to knock your 10% estimate, TB!]
No worries! I actually was about to edit mine to include that we do a lot of funky stuff, high cyl, elderly, borderline low vision, lots of outside RXs from... Ophthalmologist techs. Post cataract RXs that may or may not be written after a prudent period of healing. If I can keep lab remakes at 2% I'm happy, another 3-5% "optician remakes" (bad segs, bad fit, got made fun of by daughter for the frame they picked out, misunderstanding the "needs of the patient" and another 5% for Dr. RX changes, I'm a happy camper.Originally Posted by Hayde
You are right though your mileage may vary! If I was cranking out the -1.00s to -3.00's spheres that some places were all day long I'd be expecting stricter numbers.
The industry average for remakes is of little concern to you. What is important is your percentage of remakes, how you track them and what remedial measures you take to reduce them to zero.
Using an industry average could be a good tool to benchmark controllable remakes. Then, develop an action plan to reduce it from there. Controllable remakes for a dispensary is data entry and measurements, as well as proper fit and lens selection. Uncontrollables are warranties and outside lab remakes. Dr remakes can be controlled to a point. This will depend on the skill of the optician(s) and a strong relationship with your ODs, if they are part of your practice. My biggest pet peeve is a quarter diopter change, usually due to poor troubleshooting.
From a lab perspective, optical errors and cosmetic errors are the key culprits, and should be controlled. Opticians, please do not hide your errors under lab remakes. If you do not like how a lab finishes your order, and you did not give specifics, own up to it. Good labs will select BCs and edging for best fit. If you are particular about a bevel, notate it. If you need a specific tint, send a sample. The lab cannot read your mind.
Every practice should focus on controllable remakes. Your lab will thank you. Your ODs will thank you. Most importantly, your patients will thank you.
Agreeing with rbaker. What measures you take to reduce them to zero means how long you can keep your doors open.
Up here in the glorious great North where Trump is only a washed up reality TV star (thank God), we sit around 7% on a national average. I'd say 5% is for those 'stupid lazy' mistakes ans 2% for 'quality' redos.
Last edited by Lab Insight; 07-26-2017 at 05:51 AM.
Over here in Maryland, we are no so lucky. DC is a stone's throw away.
I just reviewed our last 3 years of remakes for our clinics and lab, and found that we are around 7% as well. This includes OD/MD remakes, post cat remakes, 'stupid lazy' remakes, 'my family hates them' remakes, and quality remakes. This does not include warranty remakes. Lab/Quality remakes are under 1.5%, Optician remakes are around 3%, and the rest come in around 2.5%. We have a fairly generous RX change policy for internal refractions. I'm thinking this is pretty good, but can be better.
Our main culprit has always been edging errors due to ancient machines. Surfacing comes in next (again, machinery that shares my birth year) but doesn't beat out optician errors, frame changes, and Dr changes combined. I'm the only one who cares enough to track such things and I don't often have time, so my records are a little dated.
I think lensmanmd hit the nail on the head though! I am fortunate enough to be involved in what I sell from start to finish (except digital) and it gives me an advantage to reduce remakes. I encourage the opticians to utilize everyone here. Take the Rx and the frame to the techs and get insight when you can. Being cross-trained has huge advantages in avoiding errors. What I have learned from lab work has made me a much better optician.
Have I told you today how much I hate poly?
"Can't manage what you don't measure..."
And yep, cross-training is Quincential.
(Woops, I mean 'Quintessential.') ;P
"Can't manage what you don't measure..." - - - A quote from Peter Drucker.
Oh, so stealing this!!! I love it!
Have I told you today how much I hate poly?
At 10% my lab fires the customer! But their pricing is verrrrry aggressive!
I wish I could "fire my customers". Ha!
Honestly, though, if a practice had over 10% remakes (not including warranties), I'm not sure how they keep their doors open!
The sad thing about my 10% figure it is mostly outside RX Dr. Changes that are the culprit, the in house ODs here are two of the most accurate and good at communicating with the patients I've ever worked with.
Still I will not turn away that Outside money!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks