Why Don’t Frames Seem to Fit Anymore?
Disclaimer: Below are the expressed opinions of the author and are not reflected by ODMA eyetalk
eyetalk Blog; Ill-Fitting Frames
Blogger: Steven Daras
Hi folks,
Are you like me and look at other people’s glasses? As a professional optical dispenser, I often tend to look at people’s spectacles. It’s not voyeurism per se, but my critical eye is working overtime. I try not to be obvious, and may occasionally be clandestine during my look, but look I will.
The sad thing is that I’m often disappointed with what I see. In most cases I see ill-fitting frames, frames that slip because the sides of the frames are too narrow for the wearer’s head that pinch against the side of the head, causing them to push forward. Frames where the sides haven’t got the correct length to bend that are either too short or too long that cause various issues, or those frames that are fitted at crazy angles. I didn’t realise that retroscopic tilts were in such favour. I hope that whoever fitted these frames know what they are doing, as there aren’t too many times (if any) when this type of adjustment is warranted.
Good quality frames have a range of fitting points designed and engineered into them, allowing the frame to be adjusted at various points so that they can be custom-fitted or tailored to fit a variety of head and facial requirements. Cheaper frames have less adjustability in them, so may not be able to be fitted correctly or easily, so it’s up to the optical professional to advise and explain these limitations and guide the wearer to a better fitting option. If the frame doesn’t fit them like a glove, then find another that looks similar but can be fitted correctly and hold its position.
Frames should be fitted with pantoscopic angles, so the frame tilts forward on the face, i.e., where the top of the frame tilts away from the brow and the bottom of the frame is angled towards the face without touching it.
Pantoscopic angles are important, as they allow all lenses to work well and those with reading areas to have these areas or segments sitting closer to the eye, increasing the fields of view (FOV) of the lens. In fact, progressive powered lenses (PPL) rely on this to increase the usability of the progressive corridors/channels, as well as the overall reading area. Most lens companies publish this is in their fitting advice for PPL.
Retroscopic angles, on the other hand, have the top of the frame tilted back towards the brow while the bottom rim is pushed further away from the face. This means that any lens and especially those with a reading areas or zones are now affected. The FOV in these areas are reduced, as well as allowing other lens aberrations to manifest.
This is why all spectacle frames must be custom fitted to the wearer before any frame related measurements are taken. The frame must be able to fit comfortably and hold the lenses in the correct position. Once adjusted, the frame will be sitting very close in its final position (the weight of the finished lenses may need a minor adjustment tweak), and the wearer will be able feel their comfort during the measurement processes.
While multifocal lenses (aka, bifocal and trifocal lens types*), are more forgiving than PPL, but like PPL, work better with frames that have pantoscopic angles with forward tilts. This allows their intermediate and near segments to sit closer to the eye, increasing their FOV and usability. Every lens company understands the importance of doing this and promote good fitting techniques for their lenses.
*All practitioners should also know that according to International (ISO) and Australian/New Zealand (A/NZ) Standards that multifocal lenses is the correct term for lenses that have visible or discreet segments and set focal lengths for distance, intermediate, and near.
Quality educators explain, demonstrate, and promote correct frame fitting techniques, so every qualified optometrist and optical dispenser is taught (or should be) this during their studies. Yet people continue to wear ill-fitting frames that can affect the optics of their lenses and frame comfort. Good frame fitting techniques are demonstrated during their studies, but then seem to forget when they go back to work. Or is it case of workplace interference, “No, you don’t need to do that, forget all the TAFE Digital stuff, we don’t have time to do that…,” a busy workplace often looks for shortcuts. Being busy is a poor excuse and unprofessional. If it’s not a busy practice, then there is no excuse for being lazy.
If practitioners do not keep up to date, they may become complacent and set in their ways. They may have been taught 20 years ago and still practise the same tasks, others trust there mentors who may have studied 30 years ago and kept their teachings alive, because they were good. The most probably were 30 years ago, but frames and lenses have changed greatly in those years, so new techniques are needed. Finally, some people in senior management positions may think that they know everything, but they don’t, and end up becoming arrogant (“It’s my way or the highway”). I don’t know anyone who does know everything, and I’ve met some of the best.
How many times have you heard of a doctor who isn’t that good at what they do? We’ve either experienced or heard from someone who has had a poor diagnosis or given incorrect treatments. The term ‘quack’ is often used to describe some doctors or other poor performing professionals. The same can be said for anyone providing a service or trade. Just because someone has a qualification doesn’t mean that they’re automatically good, it only means that they have a qualification. Another (older) saying is “…Did you get your qualification out of Kellogg’s Cornflake box?” Years ago as a marketing ploy, Kellogg’s used to include toys, certificates, prizes etc., inside their breakfast cereals, so getting your qualifications from Kellogg wasn’t high praise (I think there a few cereal MBA’s out there).
The sad thing here is that the public trusts the optical dispensary to do things correctly. This trust is given in good faith and is implicit, so there is an expectation if you’re working in a nice looking and seemingly successful practice or retail outlet, that you know what you’re doing and are doing it correctly. The ill-fitting frames I’ve seen suggests this isn’t happening (perhaps they’re employing the snap, crackle and pop technique). Looks like there may be a lot of people who learned how to fit frames while eating their Rice Bubbles.
A lot of people having given their optical practice their trust and wear these poor fitting frames without too many complaints. They use their visual resilience to put up with poorer vision and live with the inconvenience of a poor frame fit; they just get on with wearing their glasses as they believe the line, “Don’t worry, you’ll get used to it.”
People can and do adapt to a lot of things, especially when they trust their advisors. Some practitioners hide behind the idea that, “I’m good because I don’t get any complaints” but when clients don’t complain it doesn’t mean they aren’t experiencing problems, it just means that they’re coping as best they can. So, don’t look for justification based on not receiving any complaints. The fact that optical practices haven’t received any complaints doesn’t mean that there aren’t any, it means they’ve got trusting clients.