Why doesn't my new glasses prescription do enough to help to improve vision?

ivorystraws

Hi,

I recently went into a well known opticians to get a new lens prescription for my glasses. I have Keratoconous, stigmatism in both eyes, left inferior quandrantanopia in both eyes and made the optician aware of this. She completed the examination and I picked up my new glasses a week later. I was told to give my eyes some time to adjust to the new lenses since there was such a difference between my last prescription. So I've given it about two and a half weeks but although my vision has improved, a lot of things are still blurred or difficult to read. For example, I can't read the instructions on the back of a packet of soup with my glasses and reading emails is slow.

I've gone back to the opticians twice now and they've checked the prescription but keep maintaining that it's a result of the prescription change and may need more time. They also say that the Keratoconous is a contributing factor. I've booked another eye appointment with them on Wednesday but what other explanations could there be for this? How can I get a glasses prescription that actually gives me crisp clear vision or will it take my eyes more than two weeks to adjust?

Thanks.

RiseToMe

Unfortunately due to the condition you've mentioned it may not be possible to correct your vision to "20/20" due to the steep curvature of your cornea.

On your return visit I'd advise you to ask the optician If this is the best level of vision you can achieve

ivorystraws

RiseToMe wrote: »

Unfortunately due to the condition you've mentioned it may not be possible to correct your vision to "20/20" due to the steep curvature of your cornea.

On your return visit I'd advise you to ask the optician If this is the best level of vision you can achieve

On my return to the Optician, they confirmed my glasses prescription was approximately correct (slight variation in one eye). But when compared to my previous glasses, they concluded that it was helpful to add some magnification. However, I was told that I had to buy a second pair of glasses as the added magnification to my lenses would only be a hindrance for viewing objects in the distance e.g. driving etc. The added magnification does seem to help for computer based viewing, reading, watching TV etc.

Does all this seem correct i.e. with my eye conditions, should I really need two separate pairs of glasses, one pair of glasses for near sightedness and one pair glasses for viewing objects in the distance?

RiseToMe

ivorystraws wrote: »

On my return to the Optician, they confirmed my glasses prescription was approximately correct (slight variation in one eye). But when compared to my previous glasses, they concluded that it was helpful to add some magnification. However, I was told that I had to buy a second pair of glasses as the added magnification to my lenses would only be a hindrance for viewing objects in the distance e.g. driving etc. The added magnification does seem to help for computer based viewing, reading, watching TV etc.

Does all this seem correct i.e. with my eye conditions, should I really need two separate pairs of glasses, one pair of glasses for near sightedness and one pair glasses for viewing objects in the distance?

What age are you? Roughly even

ivorystraws

RiseToMe wrote: »

What age are you? Roughly even

I'm in my mid thirties.