Pros and Cons of aspheric vs non aspheric

[Eyedentity3]

Hi everyone,

I have a patient with a script of

-9.75-4.00x175
-11.25-1.25x150

Single Vision lens. My associate sold the patient a 1.74 with transitions. The lab says they can do the job in a non-aspheric lens. I don't think this will be a problem since the frame chosen is small at a 49 eyesize, weight and thickness will be minimal. Thickness is what is most important to this patient, do you think a 1.67 aspheric would be a better option? or will aspheric vs non matter?

Thank you guys/gals for taking the time.

Josh

[Robert Martellaro]

Hi everyone,

I have a patient with a script of

-9.75-4.00x175
-11.25-1.25x150

Single Vision lens. My associate sold the patient a 1.74 with transitions. The lab says they can do the job in a non-aspheric lens. I don't think this will be a problem since the frame chosen is small at a 49 eyesize, weight and thickness will be minimal. Thickness is what is most important to this patient, do you think a 1.67 aspheric would be a better option? or will aspheric vs non matter?

Thank you guys/gals for taking the time.

Josh

Josh,

The sphere equivalent best form base curve for 1.74 is about +2.50. An aspheric design will allow the use of a flatter BC, reducing thickness and weight by about 5%, and reducing minification to a greater degree. However, I doubt that there's much available in transitions 1.74, maybe an Autograph Vantage.

If all you can get is spherical 1.74, I would switch to 1.67 aspheric, which is about the same thickness as spherical 1.74 (unless you fudge the optics), or if appropriate for the client, an atoric POW optimized design.

[Paul Smith LDO]

I just dispensed a similar Rx, with half the amount of cyl. in your OD and an ADD 2.50. I put the patient in a FF FT-28, HI 1.67. She had a NRPD 27.5/26.5, the frame was an acetate with a measurement of 47/16. The patient was very impressed with the distance portion of the FT 28 lens. I have had similar experiences with the FFSV HI-1.67. As to the patients primary concern; edge thickness, depending on horiz. and vert. decentration he may be looking at an additional 1.0-1.5mm in edge thickness(off the top of my head). As Robert said earlier not much of a difference.

[Optician1234]

Hi everyone,

I have a patient with a script of

-9.75-4.00x175
-11.25-1.25x150

Single Vision lens. My associate sold the patient a 1.74 with transitions. The lab says they can do the job in a non-aspheric lens. I don't think this will be a problem since the frame chosen is small at a 49 eyesize, weight and thickness will be minimal. Thickness is what is most important to this patient, do you think a 1.67 aspheric would be a better option? or will aspheric vs non matter?

Thank you guys/gals for taking the time.

Josh

with a 49 cut out, it's going to look the same both ways... If you cut out a 49 in non and asph. and compared the two together side, they would look identical

[Judy Canty]

Hi everyone,

I have a patient with a script of

-9.75-4.00x175
-11.25-1.25x150

Single Vision lens. My associate sold the patient a 1.74 with transitions. The lab says they can do the job in a non-aspheric lens. I don't think this will be a problem since the frame chosen is small at a 49 eyesize, weight and thickness will be minimal. Thickness is what is most important to this patient, do you think a 1.67 aspheric would be a better option? or will aspheric vs non matter?

Thank you guys/gals for taking the time.

Josh

www.opticampus.com

[jspayneii]

You should be able to get a FreeForm SV in 1.74 Transitions now. We are able to do this in our house branded Digital SV product. The Shamir Autograph SV and Spectrum SV are also available. I believe Essilor has the 360 SV available as well.