Kerasoft 3 lenses

[pepepepe]

Great post Rosemary !!

[pepepepe]

Lynn, how much do you charge for the untrailed/studied Kerasofts

And Gareth of course we are talking of the NHS Moorfield and not Dubi

The camera never lies they say - its on the conferance DVD the wonderful and balanced presentation from the Optom from Moorfields - the other Optom there you can see nodded yes to what he was saying

After phoning around for the costs, it is 450 pounds to 600 pounds for a pair of fitted contacts privately - and softs last for 9 months to a year I was told !

[Lynn White]

Pepe,

You do seem to have a bit of a bee in your bonnet! I don't charge that much for KeraSoft but really, my private pricing is irrelevant as to whether products work or not. And before you jump on me to say that I would say that anyway, just let me point out that specialist RGP lenses, privately, can cost the same as you were quoting and that sclerals can cost up to £2000 a lens. The NHS does a fantastic job of subsidising KC lens costs, so that patients don't have to worry about what lens is fitted to them. No-one in the UK is forced to go privately - it is an informed choice. Private prices for any lenses have to reflect the real cost to the practitioner - this price is picked up by the hospitals in NHS situations.

I am also not sure what you are implying re infection risks. The vast majority of contact lens fittings world wide are soft lenses in all their forms. It is really only Keratoconus and ortho-K that is predominantly RGP. As I said, the launch this year of several SiH lathe-cuttable materials has revolutionised specialist soft lens fittings across the entire medical range and only a couple of weeks ago, KeraSoft3 was mentioned as a contributing factor in delaying the need for grafting in Keratoconus (At MCLOSA). This is because many people have to resort to grafting when they can no longer tolerate any rigid lens. Now, if they can tolerate a soft lens or a hybrid (e.g Synergeyes), that need for grafting is delayed.

This is not a minor issue. We take for granted in the UK that there are many options available to us. But in many countries the situation is different. I have visited Trinidad and South Africa this year on lecture tours. In Trinidad, KC patients are offered grafting if RGPs don't work (as in not tolerated) as there are/were no other CL options. As there are no graft banks there, this would mean travelling to Miami to get a graft - way beyond most people's means, leaving them to cope with no vision. In South Africa, again there are only RGP options so grafting is the only alternative - except... because of AIDS, grafting is incredibly expensive as one has to ensure the graft is AIDS free.

In both countries, KeraSoft3 has been effective in restoring vision and avoiding the need for grafting. I worked with the Sangre Grande Hospital Ophthalmology, Trinidad clinic to fit patients who had really no quality of life at all as they had no vision. Now, some of the difficult patients did not get the 6/4 vision they might have got with RGPs, but what they did get was enough vision to be able to work and drive - a vast improvement on "counting fingers" or seeing hand movements.

I am not saying one lens is better than another here - I am merely saying that tolerance is an issue that has to be addressed. Good vision can be obtained with soft lenses and R&D for all contact lens manufacturing companies is constantly striving to help keratoconics to get the best vision with maximum comfort and ocular health.

Lynn

[naveed]

HI Everyone

I agree with Lynn tolerance is a big issue . I am using Kerasoft 3 at the moment . Although I have a massive issue for Vision as compared to RGP but that is not due to they being Kerasoft 3, that is just due to reason I just had CCL about 1 week ago and my eyesight is fluctuating .

But I feel lot more comfortable as compare to RGP . With vision I hope and can only hope once my eyesight is settled I will able to see close to RGP .

and about the cost .

ITS as simple as that WHAT YOU PAY YOU GET , yes NHS is very good but only when they want to be not when you want them to be ,like problem with waiting times etc. If your lens is lost what happens .... you might have to wait for ages to get.

But one good thing about NHS , keeps you busy and waiting for appointment dates... The year goes so fast

But yes in case of like sclerals which cost up to £2000 a lens I dont mind waiting for 3 months .Because that like a lottery for £51 your get £2000.00 stuff .

I have also checked in Europe , they are bit cheaper than U.K . But not a huge difference .

I can wear my kerasoft 3 for about 10 to 12 hours no problems at all .

Anyone knows about about lens insurance in U.K if any ?

Naveed

[pepepepe]

I say it again - this elevated risk was mentioned by the Optom from Moorfields not those who are selling them. KC paiients need to wear their contacts for super long times and can't switch to glasses like a "normal" soft contact lens wearer.

I am just using your logic, which you posted before, on to the trailed Kerasofts (I quote you below)

we in the UK are particularly haunted by the Thalidomide disaster. It taught us that what seemed to be an innocuous treatment could have horrendous consequences. For those of you too young to remember, Thalidomide was a mild anti nausea tablet given to pregnant women for morning sickness - it also helped them sleep. However, what did not come out in the trials is that it is tetragenic - that is it damages the unborn foetus. Many children all over the world were born without limbs.

Recently, aspirin came under fire after being considered so beneficial for years that people were advised to take it routinely over 40.

This all points to being very cautious about new treatments, no matter how safe they appear to be in the short term. But then defining "short" and "long" term is very difficult!

None of this is easy. There are no clear answers. Its a case of risk assessment and every individual has a different definition of what their own risks are. I will admit that professionals can get over-enthusiastic about treatments - mainly because they have to deal with the consequences of conditions day after day and the really want to help their patients. Some patients want cures no matter how new or how untried they are. Its human nature and often its the combination of professional enthusiasm and patient eagerness that pioneers groundbreaking medical treatments.

So cclman, I do think you are being cynical about doctors as they do have to weigh everything neutrally. Insurance companies, on the other hand, are businesses and have an entirely different agenda!

[LondonExile]

Didn't realise that I had started a thread which had brought such differing opinons about the use of Kerasfot3 lenses over RGP lenses.

I've had my lesnes for about 3 weeks now, so felt it was time to give a more rounded update on how they are working for me.

Well, I work in front of a PC screen all day (and then come home to do the same again) and drive to and from work. My vision with the lenses is amazing. Really, i can;t tell how much difference there is between the lesnes and plain old glasses. I can get them in and out in under a minute and have managed to keep them in for about 24 hours, without any adverse reactions\soreness\red-eye. Yes, there are days when I can;t get them in or they feel uncomfortable, but int he past three weeks or so that happened just twice.

I'm starting back at the gym in a couple of weeks, so will give them a road test there to see how they hold up during exercise. So far and I touched upon the endurance levels of having them in for an extended time - being out all day at a social function and ending up in a club until 6 in the morning they have performed better than I could ever have hoped for.

As for driving, well It's easier during daylight - with or without glasses\lenses or even whether or not you have KC. I do get some minor glare issues whith headlights but nothing I wasn't already getting to a certain degree wearing glasses. A lot of this is down to being tired at the end of the day, rather than just caused by the lenses themselves. That is really my only negative point about the Kerasoft lens.

Price wise - they ain't cheap! Mine costs £150 every three months. But the benefits thay have brought me make them worth every penny, so in that respect I have no issues with the price, but I wouldn;t say no to getting them cheaper!!

Until such time as I can afford CXL or better lenses come along or there is a cure (does anyone have any info on current research and future treatments that may stop\reverse\cure KC please let me know) then Kerasoft3 lenses are where I'm at and want to stay.

[pepepepe]

LondonExile,

Thanks for your post - why do you need a new pair every three months ? is !50 pounds with vat too ? you have the think of these things at this price !

Can you wear glasses to some point ? is glare at night worse with K3 than other corrective lensesyou have tried ?

Thanks for any insights you can provide

Pepe

[LondonExile]

Pepe,

The K3 lenses are three monthly disposable lenses. It's £150 inclusive of VAT, though I'm hoping witht he reduction of VAT recently by HMG they will come in a little cheaper when I pick up my next lens in Feb

I can't make any comment on other lenses, simply because apart from trying RGP lenses once I haven;y used any sort of lens before.

As most people have mentioned here KC is something that affects everyone differently. Whats right for me (and thus far K3 lenses are right for me) won't necessarily be right for everyone else.

I have glasses as well, which I wear when i want to give my eyes a break. That said I'm wearing them less and less now because the vision with the k3 lenses is far superior to my glasses.

[Graeme Stevenson]

With regards to the effect of the VAT cut on the cost of Contact Lenses i do think some of you will be a little dissapointed. Experts expect that the reduction will reduce the actual cost of the products by 0.8%. This is due to the fact that VAT is not payable on the total price paid due to some of the costs relating to professional fees.

On the subject of which lenses are best suited for KC we could debate that until the cows come home. Each person is an individual and indeed each cone is different so it is a matter for discussion between the patient and practitioner.

[Andrew MacLean]

Spot on, Graeme; and well put!

Andrew