Wow! So I've been away for too long, due to my vision surgery making it virtually impossible for me to read anything on a computer screen for a while. I just had my 1 month post-op and had my cyclo refraction messsured, and it's left me with a laundry list of new questions. I hope someone can help me. Once again, thanks to p27:17 and Rage for all of their help thus far.
It seems my vision is roughly 20/20 now, one month out and with the cyclo drops in. This would be cause for celebration, except it still seems to fade in and out at this point. Wondering when (if ever) it will stabilize. My optometrist says they still might be changing a bit, but she's only ever dealt with 1 other prk patient before in her life (not the same doc. that performed the surgery).
Here's the disturbing news. after the drops went in, and we ran all the tests, she told me:
her: "congrats; you're 20/20. However, you now appear to be a little far-sighted."
me: Wait a second, before the surgery, didn't I just have asitgmatism and near-sightedness?
her: "yes, but it seems you may have been overcorrected a bit. Nothing to worry about; you are what we would call 'marginally hyperopic."
me: what's that mean in a prescription?
her: "oh, well, it ends up being only like a +.75... It may even correct itself over time, as it's possible your eyes are still healing."
OK, at this point, bells, whistles, and warning lights began flashing in my head. So I came here to see what information I could get before I proceed any further.
My understanding is that... in order to qualify for ANY rated slot (FC1, 1A, 2, 3, etc.) I could have ZERO hyperopia. Am I wrong here? Is that ZERO number the prereq. for the surgery only? Someone throw me a life raft here, b/c if I just forked over a ton of money and had a great doc. (he really is one of the top surgeons in the field) who somehow overshot the mark and now earned me a DQ, I need to start taking some action, or at least looking at my options.
The other side of it is this. Let's say I can't be hyperopic at all... Is that when I get to Brooks, or at ANY point of the post-op recovery. In other words, let's say my doc. is right and my eyes are still changing, and the hyperopia goes away over the next few months. If it's on the sheet at month 1, is that a DQ? Moreover, one of the requirements is that I don't have a change in vision by more the -.50 during my recovery. If it changes from +.75 to a 0, am I really gonna get DQ's for that?
I'm getting a bit nervous here, and I'm going to go to the optometrist tomorrow to get an official copy of the numbers, but if anyone can clue me in here before that, let me know... please!
~C.G.
0
USAF / USA / USN / USMC Vision
Started by Guest_doctidy_*, Jan 18 2006 05:12 PM
173 replies to this topic
#22 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 06 December 2006 - 05:51 PM
Hey man congratulations on your surgery...I can tell from your post that (like many people, myself included) a little bit of knowledge can be bad for our health.
Let me answer your post from 2 directions personal and professional.
I had PRK in 2002, now I am considerably older than you so I was told going in that my perfect near vision would be gone and replaced with perfect distant vision ( I have to now wear reading glasses) The juice was worth the squeeze for me since I had worn glasses for my distant vision most of my life. As I recall, what you are experiencing is the normal healing process and things should get better with each visit to your doc.
From the professional aspect, what you have posted is no cause for alarm at this point for several reasons:
1. It's too early post-op
2. After your 3 month visit, you can begin/complete your IFC 1 (a considerable amount of healing should have taken place by then).
3. 1 year post-op you can get your MFS (most, if not all healing should be complete by then)
4. If your near vision has changed and now you have 20/30 or better uncorrected near vision that is correctable to 20/20 you won't need a waiver for it.
So hang in there, be careful with your new eyes, get all of your required follow-ups, and then let the chips fall where they fall.
Good luck
Let me answer your post from 2 directions personal and professional.
I had PRK in 2002, now I am considerably older than you so I was told going in that my perfect near vision would be gone and replaced with perfect distant vision ( I have to now wear reading glasses) The juice was worth the squeeze for me since I had worn glasses for my distant vision most of my life. As I recall, what you are experiencing is the normal healing process and things should get better with each visit to your doc.
From the professional aspect, what you have posted is no cause for alarm at this point for several reasons:
1. It's too early post-op
2. After your 3 month visit, you can begin/complete your IFC 1 (a considerable amount of healing should have taken place by then).
3. 1 year post-op you can get your MFS (most, if not all healing should be complete by then)
4. If your near vision has changed and now you have 20/30 or better uncorrected near vision that is correctable to 20/20 you won't need a waiver for it.
So hang in there, be careful with your new eyes, get all of your required follow-ups, and then let the chips fall where they fall.
Good luck
#23 Guest_clemon220_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 17 January 2007 - 03:06 PM
Quote
Originally posted by P27:17:
2. After your 3 month visit, you can begin/complete your IFC 1 (a considerable amount of healing should have taken place by then).
Good luck
2. After your 3 month visit, you can begin/complete your IFC 1 (a considerable amount of healing should have taken place by then).
Good luck
I was of the impression that I could apply for the waiver once my 12 month eval. had completed. If you don't have the time to answer this post, don't worry about it (I'm sure it's complicated). I'm lucky enough to have a very dedicated contact with a Col. at an ROTC Det. that has already jumped through hoops to help me wherever my recruiter may fail. Nevertheless, knowledge is power.
Therefore, more knowledge makes me more powerful...
or something like that.
~Corwin
#24 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 18 January 2007 - 09:29 AM
Corwin,
You can get your IFC 1 exam done (anywhere other than Brooks)3 months post-op PRK. It will go through the normal waiver process and once stamped it will say something to the effect "Qualified with waiver for PRK, pending MFS eval". This means you cleared on your IFC 1 but need to go through MFS 1 year post-op at Brooks prior to UPT.
Hope this helps.
You can get your IFC 1 exam done (anywhere other than Brooks)3 months post-op PRK. It will go through the normal waiver process and once stamped it will say something to the effect "Qualified with waiver for PRK, pending MFS eval". This means you cleared on your IFC 1 but need to go through MFS 1 year post-op at Brooks prior to UPT.
Hope this helps.
#25 Guest_doctidy_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 09 January 2007 - 08:19 PM
I've been promising a vision update and it looks like the date will be the last two weeks of Feb. If you've been DQ before, know someone who has been DQ, tell them to tune in to the best Aeromed Forum on the WWW!
As for a glimpse...
- pre-op vision test will be on the order of: if the doc holds up a finger, asks how many, and you guess either one or two, you will qualify for corrective surgery
- if you've had or want to have vision corrective surgery and are seeing or are correctable to 20/20, you will be in the game
As for a glimpse...
- pre-op vision test will be on the order of: if the doc holds up a finger, asks how many, and you guess either one or two, you will qualify for corrective surgery
- if you've had or want to have vision corrective surgery and are seeing or are correctable to 20/20, you will be in the game
#26
-
- Super User
-
- 248 posts
Flight Lead
Posted 10 January 2007 - 05:47 PM
Have a buddy that was .25 diopter outside limits when they added astigmatism pre op. Otherwise 20/20 after surgery with all timelines and post op visits met. He is now about to submit a package for the Navy. All other ducks in a row (AFOQT, BAT, Engineer, flight time etc) Awsome candidate. When can he resubmit, is it possible to send the package for approval now knowing it will take a month to get wherever it is it goes?
Would hat to lose him to the darkside.
-j
Would hat to lose him to the darkside.
-j
If you don't apply, you have a 100% chance of not getting selected.
#27
-
- Super User
-
- 277 posts
Flight Lead
Posted 13 January 2007 - 05:29 PM
I have a friend who got the DQ for retinal perforation...any hope for him? Or is this just a change to the laser correction limits?
[ 13. January 2007, 16:29: Message edited by: gimmeaplane ]
[ 13. January 2007, 16:29: Message edited by: gimmeaplane ]
#28 Guest_doctidy_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 15 January 2007 - 08:13 PM
No help for the retinal perforation guy...
UTaviator -- I'd dust off your package.
UTaviator -- I'd dust off your package.
#29 Guest_SBKJr_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 22 January 2007 - 08:55 PM
Rage,
I was DQ'd from USAFA's PRK program in 2004 for excessive pupil diameter. Pupils were 8.7 and 9 mm when dilated. My refractive error is now -3.75 and -4.00 in each eye. I applied for an ETP and was shot down by the Vice Chief after graduation in May '06. I'm now in Nav training on a waiver for my eyes. What would the new standards mean for my gettin surgery, particulary would it affect pupil diameter at all? If I could get surgery, could I then re-apply to UPT in the future. Thank for your info, your expertise is priceless in this forum.
I was DQ'd from USAFA's PRK program in 2004 for excessive pupil diameter. Pupils were 8.7 and 9 mm when dilated. My refractive error is now -3.75 and -4.00 in each eye. I applied for an ETP and was shot down by the Vice Chief after graduation in May '06. I'm now in Nav training on a waiver for my eyes. What would the new standards mean for my gettin surgery, particulary would it affect pupil diameter at all? If I could get surgery, could I then re-apply to UPT in the future. Thank for your info, your expertise is priceless in this forum.
#30 Guest_rtstolwo_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 23 January 2007 - 01:35 AM
Rage,
When you answer SBKJr's question will you elaborate on the pupil size restrictions for me. Im sure it has to do with possible post-op halo but I was unaware there was a numerical restriction. I worry because the doc that just did my surgery made a passing comment about me having large pupils. Is the restriction just for those that are to have the PRK done by air force docs as a preventative measure or can a civvie be DQd from going the OTS route for having too large pupils? I've searched but found no specific policy from Google or an educated answer to this question from Baseops.
When you answer SBKJr's question will you elaborate on the pupil size restrictions for me. Im sure it has to do with possible post-op halo but I was unaware there was a numerical restriction. I worry because the doc that just did my surgery made a passing comment about me having large pupils. Is the restriction just for those that are to have the PRK done by air force docs as a preventative measure or can a civvie be DQd from going the OTS route for having too large pupils? I've searched but found no specific policy from Google or an educated answer to this question from Baseops.
#31 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 23 January 2007 - 09:52 AM
SBK,
You DO have large pupils...there is no standard that disqualifies you based on the size of the pupils. What the USAFA surgeon basically said is you aren't a good candidate for PRK because of the size of your pupils and the likelihood of night vision problems/halo issues post-op. You could go out and "Doc Shop" until you find a PRK surgeon who will do the surgery but be very cautious...if you are found DQ, it will be the results of the surgery that DQ you...not the pupil size.
Also, as a Nav in training you can't get PRK...once you are done and if you decide to get it you'll have to go through the Aviation CRS Program.
Good luck
rtstolwo,
I hope this clears up your question about pupil size...a passing comment is better than "we won't do your surgery because your pupils are too big"...
You DO have large pupils...there is no standard that disqualifies you based on the size of the pupils. What the USAFA surgeon basically said is you aren't a good candidate for PRK because of the size of your pupils and the likelihood of night vision problems/halo issues post-op. You could go out and "Doc Shop" until you find a PRK surgeon who will do the surgery but be very cautious...if you are found DQ, it will be the results of the surgery that DQ you...not the pupil size.
Also, as a Nav in training you can't get PRK...once you are done and if you decide to get it you'll have to go through the Aviation CRS Program.
Good luck
rtstolwo,
I hope this clears up your question about pupil size...a passing comment is better than "we won't do your surgery because your pupils are too big"...
#32 Guest_SBKJr_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 23 January 2007 - 07:03 PM
Yea, that is what the USAFA doc said to me. He told me he didn't want to do it because they only had a 6.5mm laser and if it were dark enough for my pupils to dilate up the 9mm, I'd have permanent halo problems that'd DQ me from flying in general. Claimed the largest diameter they had done surgery on was under 8mm. Put a scare in me about the procedure. But I've heard civilian docs have 10mm or better size lasers. What are the odds the AF picks up bigger laser diameters if they haven't already since 2004? I do understand that I'd have to wait for my training to finish and then follow the aviator protocol for surgery.
#33 Guest_321sevad_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 25 January 2007 - 11:32 AM
Is there any indication that any of the color vision testing rules will be changing or is this just for corrective surgery?
Thanks.
Thanks.
#34 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 25 January 2007 - 12:54 PM
SD,
Rage would know the specifics much better that I on the content of changes coming down the pike.
I suspect though, any changes to the color vision standards would tend to be MORE stringent not less...
SBK,
Here is what one of the specialists I work with have to say about your question...
"When first FDA approved, lasers could only deliver a 5.0 mm ablation zone. Consequently, anyone with a pupil much larger than that was at risk for night problems. Gradually we have expanded ablation zones to 8.0 mm today (there may be some lasers that offer larger zones, but that's where Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) is at with the VISX S4 system). So we still get uncomfortable treating people with pupils much larger than 8.0. I'm sure we will eventually have lasers with larger ablation zones, however, there isn't that much motivation to go beyond 8.0 as very few people have pupils larger than 8.0.
I saw someone note that civilian centers have lasers with ablation zones of somthing like 10.0 mm. As far as I know that's not true."
Hope it helps...good luck.
Rage would know the specifics much better that I on the content of changes coming down the pike.
I suspect though, any changes to the color vision standards would tend to be MORE stringent not less...
SBK,
Here is what one of the specialists I work with have to say about your question...
"When first FDA approved, lasers could only deliver a 5.0 mm ablation zone. Consequently, anyone with a pupil much larger than that was at risk for night problems. Gradually we have expanded ablation zones to 8.0 mm today (there may be some lasers that offer larger zones, but that's where Wilford Hall Medical Center (WHMC) is at with the VISX S4 system). So we still get uncomfortable treating people with pupils much larger than 8.0. I'm sure we will eventually have lasers with larger ablation zones, however, there isn't that much motivation to go beyond 8.0 as very few people have pupils larger than 8.0.
I saw someone note that civilian centers have lasers with ablation zones of somthing like 10.0 mm. As far as I know that's not true."
Hope it helps...good luck.
#35 Guest_doctidy_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 25 January 2007 - 05:08 PM
There is no move afoot to change color vision standards. You've gotta have perfect color vision.
#36
-
- Registered User
-
- 19 posts
SNAP
Posted 20 February 2007 - 06:34 PM
How come some sources say that the visual acuity requirements for a pilot in the AF is 20/70, and some others such as the AFROTC website say that it is 20/50?
#37 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 21 February 2007 - 11:45 AM
"How come some sources say that the visual acuity requirements for a pilot in the AF is 20/70, and some others such as the AFROTC website say that it is 20/50?"
Dan,
The 20/50 cut-off is for the PPQ (Potential Pilot Qualification)...20/70 is the max (before needing a waiver) for the AF.
Dan,
The 20/50 cut-off is for the PPQ (Potential Pilot Qualification)...20/70 is the max (before needing a waiver) for the AF.
#38 Guest_MadMagnus_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 22 March 2007 - 02:05 AM
P27:17, on Feb 21 2007, 12:45 PM, said:
"How come some sources say that the visual acuity requirements for a pilot in the AF is 20/70, and some others such as the AFROTC website say that it is 20/50?"
Dan,
The 20/50 cut-off is for the PPQ (Potential Pilot Qualification)...20/70 is the max (before needing a waiver) for the AF.
Dan,
The 20/50 cut-off is for the PPQ (Potential Pilot Qualification)...20/70 is the max (before needing a waiver) for the AF.
I have a question. I wear a weak pair of glasses (brings me to 20/20, my distance is slightly worse than 20/30 and my near is 20/20, uncorrected) and have seen the eye doctor routinely for basic check ups and whatnot. Beyond my vision, there's a lot of numbers and terms along that requirements list I don't recognize. Is being outside the margin's on those noticable? Anything I could look for in my eyesight to be able to tell if I have any of that?
#39 Guest_P27:17_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 22 March 2007 - 07:18 AM
MM,
If I understand your question correctly, the other numbers have to do with your refraction.
Your glasses have a manifest or by lens refraction. The refraction we use to determine if you meet the standards is called a cycloplegic refraction (dilation of the eyes). The standards have been posted by Rage many times. If your uncorrected distant vision is 20/70 or better and corrects to 20/20 or better you won't need a waiver unless your cycloplegic refraction exceeds the standards (the other numbers you were asking about).
Let me know if this clears the mud...
If I understand your question correctly, the other numbers have to do with your refraction.
Your glasses have a manifest or by lens refraction. The refraction we use to determine if you meet the standards is called a cycloplegic refraction (dilation of the eyes). The standards have been posted by Rage many times. If your uncorrected distant vision is 20/70 or better and corrects to 20/20 or better you won't need a waiver unless your cycloplegic refraction exceeds the standards (the other numbers you were asking about).
Let me know if this clears the mud...
#40 Guest_MadMagnus_*
-
- Unregistered / Not Logged In
Posted 23 March 2007 - 12:20 AM
P27:17, on Mar 22 2007, 08:18 AM, said:
MM,
If I understand your question correctly, the other numbers have to do with your refraction.
Your glasses have a manifest or by lens refraction. The refraction we use to determine if you meet the standards is called a cycloplegic refraction (dilation of the eyes). The standards have been posted by Rage many times. If your uncorrected distant vision is 20/70 or better and corrects to 20/20 or better you won't need a waiver unless your cycloplegic refraction exceeds the standards (the other numbers you were asking about).
Let me know if this clears the mud...
If I understand your question correctly, the other numbers have to do with your refraction.
Your glasses have a manifest or by lens refraction. The refraction we use to determine if you meet the standards is called a cycloplegic refraction (dilation of the eyes). The standards have been posted by Rage many times. If your uncorrected distant vision is 20/70 or better and corrects to 20/20 or better you won't need a waiver unless your cycloplegic refraction exceeds the standards (the other numbers you were asking about).
Let me know if this clears the mud...
Alright. I think I might know. It's the part of the eye exam when they go through the series of different lenses in their chair attachment and say "Better, or worse? 1 or 2?"
I have no idea what mine is, though. I don't think the doc has ever mentioned it or anything. I can only hope by not mentioning it, it's relatively normal.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
