This article is more than 5 years old. Information may no longer be current.
Present all vision correction options in a positive light
Click Here to Manage Email Alerts
|
|
We all like a good rivalry. We enjoy them during baseball divisional pennant races and during college basketball season. Rivalries don’t just end with athletic competition. They play a significant role in many other aspects of society, including education, government and industry.
Professionally, we witness this every day as pharmaceutical, contact lens and ophthalmic lens manufacturers push one another to develop newer, better products. Simply put, rivalries are influential in many respects and – for the most part – play a healthy and productive role in society.
Unfortunately, not all rivalries are healthy – or productive. Consider the simmering rivalry between refractive surgery and continuous wear contact lenses. Just recently this issue resurfaced when yet another “study” implicated refractive surgery as a safer option than continuous wear.
Researchers attempted to compare these diverse technologies with respect to the risk of complications. The authors sought to resolve the age-old debate as to whether continuous wear or refractive surgery is less risky. What is significant here is not which technology is the winner “du jour,” but rather which technology is the loser, perhaps unfairly so.
The truth is that both refractive surgery and continuous wear contact lenses are safe and effective. Both have changed the lives of many patients in a positive way. However, neither technology is without limitation.
We’ve all witnessed patients who have either failed at continuous wear or who have experienced a suboptimal refractive surgery outcome. Unfortunately, a few have even lost best-corrected visual acuity. However, vision loss with either option is extremely rare. It is for precisely this reason that any comparison is difficult – and tenuous at best. When you consider the many variables involving patient, doctor and technology, it’s virtually impossible to deem one choice as unequivocally less risky than the other. To do so can be confusing and misleading to the public we serve.
In the final analysis, the proper candidate, prescribed the appropriate contact lens by a skilled clinician, will enjoy many years of successful continuous wear. Likewise, a viable candidate, with the benefit of a contemporary laser platform, at the hands of an adept surgeon, will be thrilled with his or her refractive outcome. In fact, we’ve had our share of patients who have opted for both technologies at different points in their lives.
Given that both continuous wear and refractive surgery are viable – and coveted – alternatives, why not present each in a positive light? To do so does not imply that each is universally applicable to everyone. To do so stimulates interest and bolsters patient confidence, ultimately resulting in better care. Rival that.