Medical Forum / General / Vision / July 2005
Acuvue Oasys - soon?
|
|
Thread rating:  |
keith - 20 Jul 2005 04:21 GMT Does anyone have any news on the Acuvue Oasys lense - timeframe on when it will be available in the U.S.? Already available in Europe, I've heard some good things about its wearability and comfort (low coefficient of friction, etc). Has anyone done comparisons to Purevision or N&D?
KeithB
y_p_w - 20 Jul 2005 04:34 GMT > Does anyone have any news on the Acuvue Oasys lense - timeframe on when > it will be available in the U.S.? Already available in Europe, I've > heard some good things about its wearability and comfort (low > coefficient of friction, etc). Has anyone done comparisons to > Purevision or N&D? <http://www.optiboard.com/forums/showthread.php?t=12259>
SENOFILCON? Where do they come up with these names?
LarryDoc - 20 Jul 2005 06:44 GMT > > Does anyone have any news on the Acuvue Oasys lense - timeframe on when > > it will be available in the U.S.? Already available in Europe, I've > > heard some good things about its wearability and comfort (low > > coefficient of friction, etc). Has anyone done comparisons to > > Purevision or N&D? I was told USA roll out begins mid August and complete by end of August. Some docs may receive lenses earlier.
--LB, O.D.
Dr. Leukoma - 20 Jul 2005 12:48 GMT I'm wearing mine now.
They're fabulous.
DrG
Dr. Leukoma - 20 Jul 2005 12:55 GMT Since I've worn all the silicone-hydrogels, I can say that the the new Acuvue Oasys(sp?) is very, very comfortable, and the vision is very clear...far, far superior to the Advance.
It's too early yet to make any conclusions relative to other lenses, because everybody's eyes are different, but let me just say that I have already placed my stock order (being a betting man).
DrG
Meagan - 21 Jul 2005 00:21 GMT Are these available in + and toric?
> Since I've worn all the silicone-hydrogels, I can say that the the new > Acuvue Oasys(sp?) is very, very comfortable, and the vision is very [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > DrG William Stacy - 21 Jul 2005 00:55 GMT They are not available in anything until mid august, and then only in minus to 6 D. Maybe next year on the + and toric; I've learned not to hold my breath.
w.stacy, o.d.
> Are these available in + and toric? > [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] >> >>DrG LarryDoc - 21 Jul 2005 02:55 GMT > They are not available in anything until mid august, and then only in > minus to 6 D. Maybe next year on the + and toric; I've learned not to [quoted text clipped - 13 lines] > >> > >>DrG I just dealt with a patient who can't wear O2Optix in the right eye, but it's fine in the left, N&D works great in the right, but only fair in the left, and Purevision doesn't feel so great in either eye.
You never know!
Meanwhile, I STILL anxiously await plus powers and torics. I wish the manufacturers would get it together and market their si-hydros in a full range of parameters. What the hell are they waiting for? Scared of making too much money?
--LB, O.D.
y_p_w - 21 Jul 2005 15:19 GMT > I just dealt with a patient who can't wear O2Optix in the right eye, but > it's fine in the left, N&D works great in the right, but only fair in > the left, and Purevision doesn't feel so great in either eye. Sounds familiar. My left eye seems to be really tolerant of almost anything I've tried in any parameter. My lenses also look less dry removed from my left eye. My right eye seems to prefer N&D 8.4 and Advance 8.3. The 8.7 Advance felt loose after some time, with occasional double vision. They weren't "uncomfortable" though.
BTW - is it normal for lenses to change shape on the eye? Especially with the Acuvue 2 and Advance, there's a nice pronounced "cup" to the lens after they've been soaking, and they're noticeably flatter when removed from my eye.
I actually went to pick up a new prescription for the Acuvue Advance 8.3 after trying them out for a week, and I ordered several boxes at the store the OD is affiliated with. I was given a valid prescription for AV2, N&D, and Advance. I wanted to buy two boxes of AV2 and two of the Advance, but ended up getting just the Advance. I think my insurance will pick it up to a maximum benefit.
Four AV2 boxes were $79. Four Advance boxes were $99. Two AV2 boxes + two Advance boxes were $102. They had no discount unless I ordered at least four boxes of one particular lens.
So how's it usually priced if someone needs lenses of different brands?
William Stacy - 21 Jul 2005 15:49 GMT > Four AV2 boxes were $79. > Four Advance boxes were $99. [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > So how's it usually priced if someone needs lenses of different > brands? There is no "usual" pricing. Everyone is free to charge whatever they like. The above scenario seems odd, even funny to me, unless there is a 4 box manufacturer's rebate involved (these accrue to the patient only, not to the seller).
w.stacy, o.d.
crb - 21 Jul 2005 02:07 GMT >Since I've worn all the silicone-hydrogels, I can say that the the new >Acuvue Oasys(sp?) is very, very comfortable, and the vision is very [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > > The first sil hydro I tried wasn't a good experience.
Are they going to come in 2 week disposables?
Any idea how the cost will compare to Focus 1-2 week disposables -2.75
Dr. Leukoma - 21 Jul 2005 13:08 GMT > The first sil hydro I tried wasn't a good experience. Larry is right. All of the silicone-hydrogels are different in some way, i.e. water content, surface treatment, size, edge, etc.
> Are they going to come in 2 week disposables? Oasys will be marketed initially as a 2 week disposable, then sometime later, pending FDA approval, for 30 day continuous wear.
> Any idea how the cost will compare to Focus 1-2 week disposables -2.75 Don't expect one of the most advanced lenses every made to be sold at the same price as 20 year/old technology. Don't expect to be able to purchase Focus 1-2 week disposables in my practice, either.
DrG
keith - 21 Jul 2005 16:25 GMT Thanks for all the great replies. I've worn N&D, with pretty good success, tried Purevision (crisper vision in one eye, but less overall comfort) and although I'm not a doc, I think SiHy technology is definitely the way to go.
Final question - does the Oasys have surface treatment? I recall reading somewhere that the Advance does NOT have surface treatment but manages to stay moist with its "hydroclear" technology (whatever that is). I personally prefer N&D's surface treatment (my eyes tell me it's higher/different quality), but based on your message it seems like a surface treatment may or may not influence wearability (if Oasys doesn't have any)...
Thanks,
KeithB
> Since I've worn all the silicone-hydrogels, I can say that the the new > Acuvue Oasys(sp?) is very, very comfortable, and the vision is very [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > > DrG Dr. Leukoma - 21 Jul 2005 16:54 GMT Don't base your preconceptions on your experiences with the Advance. There are simply too many eye variables we cannot measure which can interact with the contact lens.
I am going on week two with the same pair of Oasys. Not once have I had any awareness that a lens was in my eye...not for a nanosecond. There is no way the Advance would have lasted this long in my eyes, nor would I have seen so clearly.
They say the technology is similar, but I doubt it. IMHO, they ought to pull the Advance off the market once they introduce the Oasys. Just my 2 cents.
DrG
y_p_w - 21 Jul 2005 20:27 GMT > Don't base your preconceptions on your experiences with the Advance. > There are simply too many eye variables we cannot measure which can [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > to pull the Advance off the market once they introduce the Oasys. Just > my 2 cents. And wouldn't you know it, they won't initially have the -6.50 I need for my right eye. The bastards. ;-)
crb - 22 Jul 2005 04:08 GMT >Don't base your preconceptions on your experiences with the Advance. >There are simply too many eye variables we cannot measure which can [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > How come you wouldn't have Focus 1-2 wk lens in your practice. I've been wearing them for 7 yrs.
What kind of disinfect solution do you use with the Oasys?
Dr. Leukoma - 22 Jul 2005 05:28 GMT My office is bursting at the seams with contact lenses of all types. I have a tendency to introduce and favor new and improved technology. Once that has become available at a reasonable cost, I find it difficult to justify continuing to prescribe the older stuff. I believe that the benefits far outweigh the modest incremental increase in cost.
I believe that the Oasys is compatible with existing care systems.
DrG
William Stacy - 22 Jul 2005 15:45 GMT What ever happended to the idea that "if it ain't broken, don't fix it"?
I will *never* change a lens brand/type without a clinical reason to do so. Plus, I *will* retain a bit of skepticism on the oasis lens, due to my experience with its "predecessor", the Advance. I'd say that 80% of the patients who liked it initially, end up disliking it. I hope the oasis doesen't have this ugly little time-bomb feature.
w.stacy, o.d.
> My office is bursting at the seams with contact lenses of all types. I > have a tendency to introduce and favor new and improved technology. [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > DrG Dr. Leukoma - 22 Jul 2005 16:42 GMT Interesting take on that, doctor. What about the idea of giving the patient an opportunity to experience new technology and telling you if it is better, worse, or no different?
I honestly thought that my once current contact lenses were the very best until I tried something new. It was only then that I discovered what was wrong with the previous brand. Subsequently, I always dig a little deeper for symptoms such as dryness, redness, or discomfort.
Would any doctor starting out today be stocking up on Focus 1-2 Week lenses?
DrG
William Stacy - 22 Jul 2005 16:58 GMT Of course I will make it available to everyone. But will I "push" it without a scientific or economic reason to do so? Probably not. As to stocking up, I try to avoid that, ALWAYS. Who needs it when we can get lenses the very next day??? Having said that, I'm always open to deep discounts for small quantity purchases of proven products. I'm also taking a bit of a flyer on the initial oasis deal, because I always like to be first on the block with anything...
w.stacy, o.d.
> Interesting take on that, doctor. What about the idea of giving the > patient an opportunity to experience new technology and telling you if [quoted text clipped - 9 lines] > > DrG Dr. Leukoma - 22 Jul 2005 17:10 GMT I think that the "scientific reasons" of increased oxygen permeability and less on-eye dryness have been amply shown. The economics are what they are and what they need to be.
DrG
William Stacy - 22 Jul 2005 17:13 GMT I bought into that argument with the Advance, and have a few unhappy patients on that one. Once burned, twice shy...
oxygen is not everything...
w.stacy, o.d.
> I think that the "scientific reasons" of increased oxygen permeability > and less on-eye dryness have been amply shown. The economics are what > they are and what they need to be. > > DrG Dr. Leukoma - 22 Jul 2005 17:35 GMT > I bought into that argument with the Advance, and have a few unhappy > patients on that one. Once burned, twice shy... Never put all your eggs into one basket.
> oxygen is not everything... Agreed. There is also hydrogen.
How many silicone-hydrogel problems have you resolved lately by reverting to Focus 1-2 Week, versus the number of Focus 1-2 Week problems resolved with silicone-hydrogels?
Anyway, here I sit wearing my Oasys lenses, and my eyes have never been happier...or so it seems. Hard to believe that it was only a few months ago that I was criticizing Vistakon here in this NG for technological torpor.
DrG
William Stacy - 22 Jul 2005 19:08 GMT > How many silicone-hydrogel problems have you resolved lately by > reverting to Focus 1-2 Week, versus the number of Focus 1-2 Week > problems resolved with silicone-hydrogels? None, but only because I don't have many trials of those left; fit lots and lots of them in the past. A good workhorse lens. I have resolved some problems by reverting to acuvue 2, to biomedics aspheric, and some extreme H20, speaking of hydrogen...
w.stacy, o.d.
LarryDoc - 22 Jul 2005 21:13 GMT > > How many silicone-hydrogel problems have you resolved lately by > > reverting to Focus 1-2 Week, versus the number of Focus 1-2 Week [quoted text clipped - 6 lines] > > w.stacy, o.d. I find it very rewarding to change a patient who has "a little redness", "a little drying", "wish I could wear my lenses a little longer into the evening"---from some old plastic into a si-hydros and see them back a week or so later with complete resolution of signs and symptoms. A big smile on their faces and then watch the referrals pour in.
I can't wait to clear out my old HEMMA trial lenses and replace them ALL with silicone hydros. The real question is: which of the si-hydros will become the "workhorse" go-to lens and the winner is............
The One that comes in the parameters that I need to properly fit my patients for comfort, vision and eye health. IMHO, the only real choices then will be old plastic daily disposables for the swimmers/surfers/bike racers (we've got lots of those kind of folks around here!) and si-hydros for daily wear two week (or so) disposable and continuous wear users. All the other stuff will be the lenses of Costco/Wal-Mart and discount chains.
Yeah, I like oxygen and hydrogen, and the more the better. Too bad it took 25 years for new technology to come to market.
--LB, O.D.
retinula@hotmail.com - 23 Jul 2005 05:15 GMT > users. All the other stuff will be the lenses of Costco/Wal-Mart and > discount chains.
> --LB, O.D. how foolish of you. The discount chains fit way more contact lenses than practices like your's. they will be the ones with all the business, and they will be the ones with the latest lenses. all the lens manufacturers know where the bread is buttered.
William Stacy - 23 Jul 2005 07:07 GMT The discount chains fit way more contact lenses
> than practices like your's. they will be the ones with all the > business, and they will be the ones with the latest lenses. all the > lens manufacturers know where the bread is buttered. I'm not sure that they actually fit contacts as much as they supply them, but the point is well taken. It's interesting that there are a few good deals at costco and sam's, and contacts might be one of them, since they truly have become a commodity and a -3 8.3 acuvue 2 is the same there as anywhere else. Same is true of Best Foods mayonnaise, although you have to buy a bigger container of it than you might want.
My main beef with those guys is all the garbage they carry in addition to those few good deals. They buy a trainload of really bad widgets for almost free, sell it off at very low prices (although it can never be low enough for defective), and laugh all the way to the bank. Plus they have the gall to charge you for the privilege of shopping there. Gag. I haven't graced their doors for years, not because of the mayo or the CLs, but because of the discontinued, overrun, and defective trash they push all the while keeping a straight face as they skim off the obscene entrance fee. At least Wal-Mart doesn't charge an entrance fee. I think they make up that by spending less on employees. Where do they find all those mentally challenged people, anyway?
w.stacy, o.d.
retinula@hotmail.com - 23 Jul 2005 13:31 GMT > I'm not sure that they actually fit contacts as much as they supply > them, my point here is simple and straight forward. and i work at a commercial location as an optometrist just so you understand where i'm coming from.
point 1-- yes, i "fit" all my patients well in contacts. i take as much time or more than private docs getting patients into the right lenses for them.
point 2-- i fit way more contact lens per week than almost any private doctor. its the nature of my business. its called "high volume refraction". we don't treat glaucoma patients, etc. so we keep our exam slots open to people wanting glasses and contacts and we see lots of them. they come to us because our exam prices match the lowest they can get anywhere in town.
point 3-- we sell our contacts inexpensively. I guess Sams club is a couple of dollars cheaper and some on-line places are cheaper too but our prices are very low.
Combined together all three of these things mean we see lots of contact patients. the contact reps track our business and know it. they kiss our butts. we get the latest lenses and the best treatment-- way before the private docs do.
this egotistical attitude the some private docs here like to portray bothers me a little. i do at least as good a job as they do at fitting contacts and glasses, at lower prices, with the latest materials. don't delude yourselves otherwise.
Dr. Leukoma - 23 Jul 2005 13:39 GMT Yes, but at the risk of getting back on topic, what about the Acuvue Oasys?
Also, what is your ratio of dispensing silicone-hydrogel lenses vs. hydrogel lenses?
DrG
LarryDoc - 23 Jul 2005 16:38 GMT And how many "choices" do you offer prospective contact lens wearers? At the commercial dispensers I've seen, some offer perhaps two brands of lenses. I offer anything that's out there and appropriate.
I'm sure there are commercial dispensers that do a fine job and get it right, just as there are private practice docs that are bozos. But when that sales rep offers the corporate honchos (or the private doc for that matter) a few thousand lenses at a ridiculously low price "if you buy it now!" , guess what lens will be their "favorite"? At least until the next reps comes by with a better deal.
And then there's the issue of contact lenses seen as medical devices with health risks and benefits verses simple consumable commodities. That perception influences compliance and responsibility.
No one here dissed commercial fitters, so why the hostility? You've opened the door, I'd suggest you try to close it.
LB, O.D.
William Stacy - 23 Jul 2005 18:27 GMT > And how many "choices" do you offer prospective contact lens wearers? At > the commercial dispensers I've seen, some offer perhaps two brands of > lenses. If that's true, then they are doing a disservice, for sure, unless they refer out anyone who doesn't fit their mold.
w.stacy, o.d.
retinula@hotmail.com - 24 Jul 2005 02:15 GMT i offer anything available that's appropriate also. and i have all major brands on hand including every type of silicone hydrogel. i fit whatever i want and/or what the patient requests. i am not told by any "corporate honcho" what to fit. if they have a deal for the customer, then it's reflected in their prices to the end user.
contact lenses are a medical devices. we treat them as such. no one but a licensed optometrist dispenses them without a valid prescription. we trial everyone in lenses before we give them a final Rx and follow-them up to be sure they aren't having any problems.
why the hostility? I guess I took the following remarks to be negative:
"All the other stuff will be the lenses of Costco/Wal-Mart and discount chains"
and
"I'm not sure that they actually fit contacts as much as they supply them"
do you think I might be wrong? really? consider the door closed.
RM - 24 Jul 2005 06:42 GMT You said this,
> And how many "choices" do you offer prospective contact lens wearers? At > the commercial dispensers I've seen, some offer perhaps two brands of > lenses. Then you imply that commercial dispensers sell-out their patient best interest for the "best deal" from optical sales reps when you said,
> I'm sure there are commercial dispensers that do a fine job and get it > right, just as there are private practice docs that are bozos. But when > that sales rep offers the corporate honchos (or the private doc for that > matter) a few thousand lenses at a ridiculously low price "if you buy it > now!" , guess what lens will be their "favorite"? At least until the > next reps comes by with a better deal. Then you try to imply that lower prices for contact lenses that are available from commercial optical suppliers causes patients to abuse their lenses when you said,
> And then there's the issue of contact lenses seen as medical devices > with health risks and benefits verses simple consumable commodities. > That perception influences compliance and responsibility. Finally you try to deny your outrageous remarks by claiming "no one here dissed commericial fitters". YOU DID!
I too work for in a commercial eyeware setting. I have also worked in private practice, in an optometry school, and with a group Ophthalmology practice. I believe my current commercial practice gives patients excellent eyecare for an excellent price. Sometimes I run into arrogant private practitioners who think they are better than their commericial practioner colleagues for some reasons I can't fathom. We all went to the same schools and passed the same proficiency exams. I guess some people need to feel superior to others.
RM Ph.D., Commercial O.D.
PS-- I think Oasys will be a nice addition to Vistakons line. Does anybody have any information on pricing?
LarryDoc - 24 Jul 2005 08:03 GMT > Then you imply that commercial dispensers sell-out their patient best > interest for the "best deal" from optical sales reps when you said, Well, it happens, in private and commercial settings. I'm glad you don't sell out your clients, but you will have to admit that it happens.
> Then you try to imply that lower prices for contact lenses that are > available from commercial optical suppliers causes patients to abuse their > lenses when you said, Nope. You mis-read that one. Cheap lenses don't cause wearers to abuse their lens. Lack of information and follow-up care does. The perception that contact lenses are commodities does lower the bar as far as people thinking that if they're so easy to get, they must be safe no matter what. That perception can, of course, be corrected with appropriate dialog.
> > And then there's the issue of contact lenses seen as medical devices > > with health risks and benefits verses simple consumable commodities. > > That perception influences compliance and responsibility. > > Finally you try to deny your outrageous remarks by claiming "no one here > dissed commericial fitters". YOU DID! No one did in the past, at least as I recall. I did so with reservations, that some commercial fitters certainly do not foster compliance and responsibility. And I added that some private practitioners are equally guilty of that same thing.
> I too work for in a commercial eyeware setting. I have also worked in > private practice, in an optometry school, and with a group Ophthalmology [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > and passed the same proficiency exams. I guess some people need to feel > superior to others. And it tires me that I have to fix people who have received inadequate eye health and vision care because they were shopping for the lowest cost or the fastest get-it-done. And again, that does not necessarily mean it happened at a commercial place but you will have to admit that is exactly why people go there. There are bozos everywhere. I'm glad your not one of them.
By the way, when I graduated from school, I was tempted by the instant big-bucks of a commercial chain, the franchise of which was run by a friend of the family. I was promised "autonomy" and promptly reprimanded and forced to quit when I did not meet the volume demanded (I refused to Rx +.50 readers, for example) and referred "customers" to private docs for testing not offered in the "store."
Well, we've yet to see "one hour pacemakers installed or replaced" signs in the big box store or 'buy one MRI and get your CAT scan free!" offer. But I'm sure it's coming.
Sorry, doc, I don't particularly care for commercialized health care, whether it's vision or plastic surgery or dentistry or anything. I also have little tolerance for incompetent doctors in private setting or even fancy university hospitals.
I don't think you can find fault with that thinking.
--LB, O.D.
retinula@hotmail.com - 24 Jul 2005 17:03 GMT you said "And it tires me that I have to fix people who have received inadequate eye health and vision care because they were shopping for the lowest cost or the fastest get-it-done."
and it tires me to have to fix patient who came from a private doctor with an Rx that wasn't right and the patient was told "you'll get used to it" and "no, we won't refund your money for those lenses that you can't wear-- we are a 'doctors' office". it really bothers me that they were charged outrageous sums of money to get this kind of arrogant treatment too.
sorry you don't like commercialized healthcare. it has settled in well in the field of optometry because customer needs were not being met by the private docs. customers were tired of paying too high of prices and getting treated by a bunch of doctors who have inflated self-opinions. this country needs major healthcare reform, and i'm not claiming that it needs to go the direction of "eyeglass world, inc." but it does need to go away from the direction self-important overpriced private doctors who try to maintain mystique around what they are really doing.
RM - 24 Jul 2005 18:53 GMT Here's my favorite.
A 45-50 year old patient comes into my commercial practice to get some new less-expensive progressives-- their last pair purchased from their private doc cost $350+. I find their distance refraction is almost plano, they see 20/20 at distance uncorrected, and they tell me they only use their specs for reading. I ask, "why are you using bifocals, why not OTC readers." They say "My eye doctor told me I needed bifocals so I bought them from him".
How's that for meeting customer needs? How's that for looking out for the patient? Would you like to be treated like that?
I'm not saying that only private docs do that, but in my state the commercial docs make no cut from the sale of specs and contacts. Thus there is no incentive for me to sell someone ANYTHING that they don't need. Not so for the private docs, and you can tell it sometimes. Of course they all aren't bad, but many are!
It all comes down to personal morals. "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you"! (and I am not religious at all, it's just common sense in a civil society).
================
> you said "And it tires me that I have to fix people who have received > inadequate [quoted text clipped - 17 lines] > overpriced private doctors who try to maintain mystique around what > they are really doing. Charles - 24 Jul 2005 16:00 GMT > I too work for in a commercial eyeware setting. I have also worked in > private practice, in an optometry school, and with a group Ophthalmology > practice. I believe my current commercial practice gives patients excellent > eyecare for an excellent price. I don't doubt your words about yourself. As a consumer though with something like my eyes I would never usually go to a practice at a Wal-Mart or other chain practice. This is just so important to get fitted right. A private practices is more likely to have more experience. Another problem with a chain type setting is that there is likely to be turnover in the practice. I have used the optometrist I go to now who is in private practice for about 15 years and he knows me and I know him. I don't want to call for an appointment and find a new optometrist there every couple of years.
 Signature Charles
retinula@hotmail.com - 24 Jul 2005 16:53 GMT some of your concerns are valid but others aren't.
yes, you might find turnover at a commercial outfit. where i work the doctor has been there for 10 years however so thats not true.
no, the private doc is not necessarily going to have more experience fitting contact lenses than the commercial doc. the commercial doc sees more patients, recommends more lenses, and probably have more communication with the contact companies than the private docs in my part of the country! we get the trial sets for the latest lenses, as well as courtesy fitting samples well before any of the private doctors do.
in my experience i have seen private docs preferentially fit private-label contacts on patients. these contacts are very similar to the more widely distributed versions but they have slight parameter differences that inhibit patients from taking their prescriptions and going somewhere else to get them filled. they only place they can get them filled is at the same doc who fit them. obviously they care more about protecting their income than getting the best fit for the patient (whose real need may include having a good fitting contact lens that is also inexpensive and can be purchased readily anywhere-- perhaps the patient travels)
sometimes private docs resist giving out a final CL Rx claiming that they need to recheck the patient again in 3-6 months after their box of private label (expensive) contacts is empty to revalidate the Rx. recent changes in federal law makes this more difficult that it was before but i know that it still happens.
look. my point is simple. don't have bias against any one group. there are good and bad eye docs practicing at any location. find one with a good reputation and stay there. i happen to KNOW for a fact that the better eye docs in my area practice at commercial locations. better in the since that they have equivalent training, at least equivalent experience, aren't out the rip off their patient for expensive materials, etc. some private docs could be like that too but some aren't.
Dr. Leukoma - 24 Jul 2005 17:57 GMT Alright already.
I spent my first year out of optometry school in commercial practice because I needed a job. The first six months of that year were spent researching a location, and the second six months were spent in setting up my private practice. During the first couple of years I figuratively "starved for my art," and for the most part haven't regretted it. My practice grew with the community, and I am now seeing the children of the children of my first patients. My practice is not limited to contact lenses and eyeglass prescriptions.
I frankly don't have any axe to grind with corporate chains or optometrists who work for them. We serve different segments of the eyecare marketplace.
DrG
LarryDoc - 24 Jul 2005 19:58 GMT > Alright already. > [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > regretted it. My practice grew with the community, and I am now seeing > the children of the children of my first patients. When you start seeing the children of the children of the children of your first patients, it's time to call it quits and retire, don't you think?
Haven't you heard from AARP yet?
--LB, O.D.
Dr. Leukoma - 25 Jul 2005 00:36 GMT Yes, I have heard from AARP yet. I refuse to reply.
I am 55 years old. Yesterday I biked 40 miles in 100 degree heat, and today I ran, jogged, another 10 in the same conditions. Perhaps I will kill myself into retirement.....
DrG
LarryDoc - 25 Jul 2005 03:32 GMT > Yes, I have heard from AARP yet. I refuse to reply. > [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > DrG You sound as nutty as me! I'm not quite 55 (but oh so close) and I biked 10 miles on the road, played 2 hours of tennis, biked another 5 on the foothill trails my my house, all in 90 degree heat. Missed the beach volleyball game, though. Shucks! It was cooler there! Yesterday's ocean swim was nice, too. I hoping to do some night riding to beat the heat---new Planet Bike SuperSpot LED light coming tomorrow!
I really love my new hybrid/road/cyclocross bike. (It started as a Trek hybrid and underwent some component changes 'cause the bike I really wanted was out of stock and far more costly than to the "almost the same" modified version.) I now commute to work daily (or at least the days I work these days!)
But I sure wish I had some of those Oasys lenses on my eyes! My rep said I'll have to wait until 8/22. (Just to get back on topic! ;-)
LB, O.D.
Dr. Leukoma - 25 Jul 2005 04:15 GMT > > Yes, I have heard from AARP yet. I refuse to reply. > > [quoted text clipped - 21 lines] > > LB, O.D. Nutty? Are you kidding? Nutty is the guy gracing the cover of the latest ESPN magazine, Mat Hoffman, the BMXer who has knocked himself unconscious over 100 times, got 52 feet of air straight up and crash landed, rupturing his spleen, heart stopped... also underwent an ACL replacement without anesthesia, and held the drill while the surgeon changed the bit...
Sounds like you're a bit closer to retirement...I just recently cut back on my Saturdays to two a month. Nice. Now, I actually have time to mow the lawn. Hmmm. Maybe I'll go back to working every Sat.
DrG
retinula@hotmail.com - 24 Jul 2005 02:20 GMT what about Oasys? i think it is a comfortable and healthy lens. i also think that about 02 Optix. I view Oasys as a product for vistakon to position against "premium" silicone hydrogels like focus night and day and purevision (which I think is really a red-headed stepchild for B&L now). they will position advance vs. O2 Optix. stratify the marketplace seems to be the approach the companies are trying to take.
like most everyone else, the majority of lenses we dispense is heavily weighted toward the traditional plastics. thats because we sell a lot of torics and multifocal as well as sphericals. a large percentage of my new patients coming in for exams are getting trialed on silicone hydrogels however-- that is unless they are wearing colors. i imagine my fitting habits are similar to yours.
William Stacy - 23 Jul 2005 15:45 GMT > this egotistical attitude the some private docs here like to portray
> bothers me a little. i do at least as good a job as they do at fitting > contacts and glasses, at lower prices, with the latest materials. > don't delude yourselves otherwise. I don't doubt that you do. Just a few questions:
1. What the heck is a "high volume refraction"?
2. How much do you charge for it?
3. Where are you located (state,country at least)?
4. How much do you charge for 1 box of acuvue 2?
5. How much for 8 boxes, same lens.
6. How much for 1 box of 66 torics?
7. How much for a spherical fitting, if in addition to #2?
8. How about a toric fitting?
9. Do you do gas perms?, if so how much for fitting, and per lens?
10. Any difference in fitting or refitting an existing contact wearer vs. a new prospective CL wearer?
Thanks
w.stacy, o.d. (you show me yours, I'll show you mine...)
Jambo - 24 Jul 2005 22:00 GMT >> users. All the other stuff will be the lenses of Costco/Wal-Mart and >> discount chains. [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] >business, and they will be the ones with the latest lenses. all the >lens manufacturers know where the bread is buttered. My local Costco carrys the Focus N+D lenses
|
|
|