Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: Essilor M'eyefit

  1. #1
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    9

    Essilor M'eyefit

    Does anyone have experience with this machine here, or those similiar? I've just received one this past Friday and can not for the life of me get a correct PD out of it. While it is fairly ACCURATE, it is accurately in-correct. I am consistently getting 1-1.5mm wide on the binocular PD with it. I've already been explained by Essilor about this magic box that knows how to convert near to distant PD and that the monocular measurement will not match against a reflex pupilometer, however the binocular measurement should be comparable even according to them. Has anyone else experienced this issue with digital stand-alone measuring devices like these?

  2. #2
    OptiBoardaholic vcom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2010
    Location
    Bangor, ME
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    225
    We have one here, and I've noticed a few things. It seems to be light sensitive, our office is more on the darker 'jewelry store' design, and we can only get it to work accurately in one particular chair that has the best lighting on the patients face. Also, much like the Zeiss Terminal we had before, head position is C R I T I C A L. Sure, it will take measurements even if they are tilted, or turned slightly to one side, but they won't be the most accurate. You can also fine tune the measurements after the fact with the Zoom feature, which has helped us tons. So far it has been better than the Zeiss Terminal we had, but it's not perfect either. I think as long as humans are involved in the process, either as the measurers, or the measurees, this is unavoidable.
    Patient, ".. Doctor says I have a subscription for stigmata.. Can you fill that?"
    Me, "..Um.. "

  3. #3
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter Barry Santini's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Seaford, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,798
    Head position is critical for all devices, whether they employ a frame reference device, or not. Lighting ditto for acquiring the cardinal points on a FRD.

    Before anyone says these devices are inaccurate, what, may I ask, are you using as a "PD" measurement to benchmark it against?

    B

  4. #4
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Santini View Post
    Head position is critical for all devices, whether they employ a frame reference device, or not. Lighting ditto for acquiring the cardinal points on a FRD.

    Before anyone says these devices are inaccurate, what, may I ask, are you using as a "PD" measurement to benchmark it against?

    B
    Of course head angles affect the measurements to some degree, a fairly large degree at that. Lighting is a given as a requirement for such a low quality camera (try as they might to pass it off as an HD device it is not one). I've been very careful to ensure head angles and machine to head angle are as straight on as possible. Lighting is also very good in our office. I have a large diffuse area of natural lighting from a rather large set of windows right beside the fitting tables, as well as strong overhead fluorescent light. As much as that is a nightmare for white balance, it is ultimately a large amount of light for this device. My concern was the opposite in that it might be skewing the reflex points in the pupils by weakening the flash, but those show up just fine in the magnified view. My concern is that it is ultimately in the way it is coded to convert the Monocular PD to a Binocular PD.

    As mentioned in my original post, I am comparing Binocular PD from the M'eyefit vs Binocular PD from a reflex pupilometer. So far I have compared 5 patients with 2-3 different frames each and at least 2 comparable measures with the same frame. As I mentioned it is VERY accurate against itself. It is inaccurate in it's overall figure of the binocular PD vs a reflex pupilometer. The measurements taken from a reflex pupilometer include 10 back to back checks by myself (4 years experience) and the other optician I work with (20+ years experience).

    Again, I will never say this device is inaccurate, that would be a lie. It repeats its measurements with near exact precision back to back to back. It is just not comparing against manually taken and/or reflex pupilometer measurements. I have to know why before I trust it to make progressive lenses based off of it's information. I also want to ensure that this it NOT the norm for the device.

    @Barry,
    Do you find you can match a binocular PD from the M'eyefit to a Binocular PD from a reflex pupilometer?

    FWIW Experimenting around more this evening I got an exact measurement that matches the PD and almost exactly matched the near PD (using a plastic frame similiar in fit to the pupilometer). Looks like it's on my end and I've got a learning curve to get passed with this machine. I was extremely cautious on this last attempt, measuring to center frame on the FRD, and ensuring head was square against the device.
    Last edited by RacingTiger03; 07-30-2013 at 12:35 PM.

  5. #5
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter Barry Santini's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Seaford, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,798
    "It is just not comparing against manually taken and/or reflex pupilometer measurements. "

    Q: Why do you feel the PD from your reflex pupilometer represents an accurate and very precise "gold" standard against which to compare with DCD's values?

    No "in your face" challenge meant here, just a thought experiment.

    Barry

  6. #6
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    9
    Point taken Barry. Here's my point of view on it. I take everything analytically until it's proven to me. Comparing it against what I know works (reflex pupilometer) is what I know to do best. Since I know I can fit a patient in a progressive based off of the reflex pupilometer, and get repeatable measurements within 0.5mm monocular and 98% of the time binocular as well (based on my own personal experiments). That is something I can compare directly against.

    The issue here is the M'eyefit uses a frame reference device, so arguably it's MONOCULAR measurement should be more exact for the patient based sheerly on the fact that that is the Pd exactly how it will be sitting in front of their eyes in that frame. Not that I've ever seen a marked up progressive be wrong on a patients face taken from a reflex pupilometer of my own measurements by any means, just a known fact that it could be +- 0.25 at least off and then that much or more from adjustment of how it sits on their nose overall. However, I would expect it 100% reasonable to assume that a Binocular PD should be a standard to compare to. The distance from right to left pupil as a whole will not change no matter the device taking the measurement. Barring any real world transformers/shapeshifter/animorphs or what have you that is lol.

    So far my responses from essilor revolve around them trying to say the inaccuracy is fine and it will vary from 1-2mm (very low level guy told me that and I was tempted to just hang up before he offered to escalate the call). Next guy up just said some variance is acceptable. I'm ok with that ideal. I'm not OK with my PD's from this device being over 1mm off on the big picture. Whether it's something I'm doing or the device and it's programming or just a bad imager on the device is what I've yet to determine and what I need to get sorted before I trust using this for patients. As it stands, I can do the PD much more accurately on my own, I've yet to try to verify it's other measurements manually PD is the easiest to get an accurate comparison from :)

  7. #7
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter Barry Santini's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Seaford, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,798
    IMHO, the ONLY importance of precise monocular/frame-referenced PDs is for proper alignment of the intermediate zones of progressives whose add is equal or greater than 2.50D...in order to deliver maximum Utility.

    However, I also believe that a truly accurate measurement only occurs when taken subjectively with the DV RX in place...as we used to do for measuring for Designs for Vision dental/surgical loupes.

    I believe Robert Martellaro would agree.

    Barry

  8. #8
    OptiBoard Novice
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Chattanooga, TN
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    9
    Quote Originally Posted by Barry Santini View Post
    IMHO, the ONLY importance of precise monocular/frame-referenced PDs is for proper alignment of the intermediate zones of progressives whose add is equal or greater than 2.50D...in order to deliver maximum Utility.

    However, I also believe that a truly accurate measurement only occurs when taken subjectively with the DV RX in place...as we used to do for measuring for Designs for Vision dental/surgical loupes.

    I believe Robert Martellaro would agree.

    Barry
    That's a lot of my problem with this actually. I work for an ophthalmologist and 70% or more of my patient base is in a 2.50 add with a PAL. I'm sure you can see how quickly it would become a large problem if a large percentage of my fits were 1-2mm off base.

    That brings up an interesting point about the DV Rx being used to accurately attain a PD. I could see how this would be an issue for stronger RX's or weaker eyes, say someone who sees 20/50 or worse without specs where weak focus could cause some drifting if the muscles aren't in perfect shape, or if focus is just off in general as the eyes try to find that exact focus point, but what of the patient with a 20/25-20/40 uncorrected eye, or even on the flip side yet, someone who even only corrects down to 20/50. What would be the most accurate option for those patients? I'm all for improved accuracy! Point me in the direction of something better and I'll go that way, regardless of marketing hype and fancy tools.

    Also worth noting, I'm expecting a call from a manager of the tech support group for essilor.. we'll see how that goes. Supposedly he is a long time optician as well.

  9. #9
    Master OptiBoarder OptiBoard Silver Supporter Barry Santini's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    Seaford, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    5,798
    I'm sure there are (deep) setting adjustments that can re-calibrate the PD results you are getting with your M'eyefit, similar to what's done with your frame tracer's PD get it to yield an accurate Frame PD.

    As far as the need for Stronger RX PD exactness: ANSI specs 2.5mm deviation from what's ordered. Only if we know if there are any latent phorias can we judge PD tolerance properly regarding prism.

    For well mapped and optimized FF SV in stronger Rxs, such as Zeiss Individual, an accurate set of measurements, inclusding PD, is necessary for rendering the best visual acuity.

    B

  10. #10
    Master OptiBoarder LENNY's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2000
    Location
    BROOKLYNSK, NY USA
    Occupation
    Dispensing Optician
    Posts
    4,327
    Any updates on m'eyeFit?
    Does it integrate with POS systems like Officemate?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Essilor
    By Matthew in forum General Optics and Eyecare Discussion Forum
    Replies: 18
    Last Post: 11-12-2011, 11:49 AM
  2. Essilor of America Debuts Essilor Junior Lenses
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 07-24-2008, 01:09 PM
  3. Essilor Announces Promotions For Essilor Labs
    By Newsroom in forum Optical Industry News
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-20-2007, 12:22 PM
  4. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 02-09-2005, 06:38 PM
  5. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 01-30-2003, 09:59 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
OptiBoard is proudly sponsored by:
Younger Optics and Vision Equipment