"Subjective" vs "true" prescription

Post your questions and start your research in this forum if more than three months ago you had any type of surgery to reduce the need for glasses and contacts.

"Subjective" vs "true" prescription

Postby 1970 » Tue Mar 10, 2009 9:41 am

I had wavefront LASIK with Intralase on 9th Feb 2008 at Ultralase here in the UK and recently had my one year check up.

I had no problems with dry eye but do still experience some starbursting and halos, although I think that these are improving. My contacts lenses were -4.0 and -3.75 with negligible astigmatism, before my operation. My eyesight is not as sharp as it was before, particularly from dusk onwards and I wear glasses for driving, that my surgeon gave me.

I have been advised that my "true" prescription ie. that measured by the various machines is marginally long sighted - +0.2 in each eye but my "subjective prescription" is short sighted - around -0.75 in each eye. My surgeon assures me that this is great result and my eyes will improve even more with time.

In 20 years of wearing lenses and glasses I have never before heard of such a thing. Indeed, I have never ever heard the phrase "subjective prescription".

My eyes are currently telling me that I'm short sighted, and I am certainly unable to read a number plate at 20m at night. I have not noticed any long sightedness whatsoever.

My surgeon has assured me that once my eye muscles relax everything will be fine and he is 100% confident of this. An enhancement, he says, will merely add +0.75 to my true prescription.

I am happy to wait for another 6 months but would like confirmation that this prognosis is plausible.

Can anyone help with this one please?
1970
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:33 am

Postby bethbeth » Thu Mar 12, 2009 2:56 am

Hi, not sure I can throw much light on it, but I had lasik about 8months ago. Like you, my vision deteriorates at dusk and in dim light and have had some specs made up (very disappointing that was!). Optician and surgeon both say I have residual shortsightedness, but they disagree with the degree. I wonder about the way they measure your eyes. Obviously the clinic is going to be more thorough, but I wonder now about the subjectivity- if you can read a line even tho it is blurry, is that considered the same as someone who can read it clearly? Anyway, I find my vision deteriorates as the day goes on. That is not something they measure is it? It's damn frustrating when they say its a good result, but you still need glasses! If a machine says one thing but you experience it another, who are you going to believe??
To me, what you are experiencing is like shortsightedness, but I think being left plus would also make vision blurry. I wonder if it would be possible for you to get a second opinion. You would have to fork out a bit more cash I know, but might help solve the riddle. Anyway, good luck. I've been told my prescription is too small to safely treat. Relieved I dont have to go through all that again, but so disappointed I still have blurry vision. I am considered a "success" tho. Oh yes, starbursts too.
I do get the feeling that the general position is to tell patients that it is too early to tell, and it all takes time etc etc. I think what happens is a lot of us acclimatise to the fact that there are residual issues and they become less dominating and we get over the disappointment and make the best of what we have been given. Least ways, that's what I'm trying to do.
Anyway, best wishes,
Beth
bethbeth
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:54 am

Postby 1970 » Thu Mar 12, 2009 11:22 pm

Thanks Beth - I have resolved to get a 2nd opinion at Moorfields Eye Hospital here in London, UK in 6 months time - that is a full 18 months post op. Indeed my current surgeon assured me that my eyes would be fine by this time.

However, I would have my 2nd opinion sooner if someone can tell me if indeed there can be such a difference between true and subjective prescriptions, how this is possible and what the likely prognosis is?

It all just seems very strange to me that my eyes are near perfect yet my vision is myopic?
1970
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Tue Mar 10, 2009 12:33 am

Postby bethbeth » Sat Mar 14, 2009 12:29 pm

That sounds like a good idea. 18months is surely long enough. Perhaps you would post again when you find out?
Beth
bethbeth
 
Posts: 7
Joined: Thu Mar 12, 2009 1:54 am


Return to Had It A While Ago

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron