[Skip to Content]
Access to paid content on this site is currently suspended due to excessive activity being detected from your IP address 54.167.181.242. Please contact the publisher to request reinstatement.
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
April 1967

-CONTACT LENSES-REPLY

Arch Ophthalmol. 1967;77(4):574. doi:10.1001/archopht.1967.00980020576035

This article is only available in the PDF format. Download the PDF to view the article, as well as its associated figures and tables.

Abstract

To the Editor:  Having had Dr. Girard as teacher of the LD + 2 method of fitting contact lenses, I welcome the opportunity to answer his letter in the light of my personal experience of fitting many patients with both the trial lens and LD + 2 techniques.Small, thin lenses are by no means exclusive to LD + 2. In comparing the results obtained by the trial lens and topogometer methods, I found that the trial lens technique in my hands sometimes resulted in the prescribing of contact lenses smaller in diameter than suggested by LD + 2. On the other hand, the use of the topogometer too frequently produces lenses that are smaller than optimum and cause unnecessary edge glare and unstable vision.The limitations of keratometry are such that it is highly unlikely that the dimensions measured by the topogometer represent the true diameter of the corneal optic cap. Furthermore, the

First Page Preview View Large
First page PDF preview
First page PDF preview
×