Why patients complain about their new spectacles

Abstract

A prospective trial of the prevalence of complaints concerning new spectacles was conducted in a sample of 1768 consecutive patients of an optometrist. This sample yielded 937 patients who were provided with spectacles. Fifty three patients returned with complaints. The most common complaints related to incorrect refraction assessments, image distortion with new spectacles and unsuitable near focal distance. Failure of communication between the patient and optometrist was a primary or contributing cause in many cases. In 7 cases no cause for the complaint could be identified at the review consultation.

What adjustments, if any, do UK optometrists make to the subjective refraction result prior to prescribing?

“…In this paper spectacle dissatisfaction will be used to define patients who return to their optometrist, unhappy with their new spectacles either as a result of incorrect prescribing or failure to adapt to the prescription. Other errors leading to patient dissatisfaction with spectacles, such as those due to dispensing errors, ocular pathology, transcription errors and communication problems (Cockburn, 1987; Mwanza and Kabasele, 1998; Hrynchak, 2006; Freeman and Evans, 2010) were not included in our definition, as the focus of this study was refraction errors and adaptation problems. The term ‘non‐tolerance’ has been used previously to describe patient dissatisfaction with their spectacles, but the word implies that the problem lies with the patient for not tolerating their spectacles.…”

“…The term ‘non‐tolerance’ has been used previously to describe patient dissatisfaction with their spectacles, but the word implies that the problem lies with the patient for not tolerating their spectacles. In most cases the problem is due to a prescription error made by the prescribing clinician (Cockburn, 1987; Mwanza and Kabasele, 1998; Hrynchak, 2006; Freeman and Evans, 2010).…”

“…Three optometric studies have reported rates of patient dissatisfaction with spectacles and an indication of likely causes. Cockburn (1987) reported 53 cases of spectacle dissatisfaction arising from 937 patients who were dispensed spectacles (from 1768 eye examinations; a 53% dispensing rate) by a Melbourne suburban practice and suggested a 5.7%‘rate of complaints’. However this headline rate included patients who were dissatisfied as a result of dispensing errors and failure due to poor communication with the patient.…”

Evaluation of the Clinical Maxim: “If It Ain't Broke, Don't Fix It”

“…[1][2][3][4][5] The available research evidence might suggest that the inherent variability of the subjective refraction result of up to Ϯ0.75 D 6,7 combined with the finding that some patients experience symptoms with prescription errors as low as Ϯ0. 25 D 8,9 means that a low level of spectacle dissatisfaction may simply be inevitable.…”

Spectacle prescribing II: practitioner experience is linked to the likelihood of suggesting a partial prescription

“…These patients not only reduce practitioner productivity by taking up an additional eye examination appointment and any associated reglazing costs, but spectacle dissatisfaction can also tarnish a practitioner's professional reputation. 4 Conventional marketing research suggests that generating negative ''word of mouth'' opinion has a much more powerful impact than positive word of mouth communication 5 and dissatisfied customers are likely to inform at least nine of their friends and colleagues of their perceived poor experience (and at least twice as many people as satisfied customers). 6 In addition, the figures above are likely to underestimate spectacle dissatisfaction rates, as some patients may simply revert back to their habitual spectacles or alternatively seek remediation with a different practitioner.…”