IT'S TOO COSTLY. AR technology can cost the same as a good pair of CR39 progressives, or as little as the lowest priced progressives on the market. In other words, it is not exorbitantly expensive, and usually retails for between $75 and $150.

IT'S HARD TO SELL. It should not be. If you sell all eyeglasses with the appropriate lens technology and include AR technology in the cost, you have now avoided having to sell an "add on" ever again. Your patient values your care for his/her eye health, and will appreciate not having to make the painful decision of having to "buy" the same pair of glasses over and over again as you suggest successively many advantageous technologies. Don't force your patient to feel you are repeatedly reaching into her pocketbook or his check book for more and more money for the same pair of glasses.

Keep it simple. Offer one price for each pair of eyeglasses, including all the technologies that will achieve the patient's best eye health. They will tell you soon enough if they want a less expensive pair of eyeglasses, and I am sure you can accommodate almost every budget with eyeglasses that will enhance their visual acuity.

AR MAKES DELIVERY TOO SLOW. Not so! There are labs like Optogenics where you can order surfaced uncut lenses with AR at 4 p.m. today, and have the finished lenses ready to be edged into the frame at your practice and dispensed tomorrow. Any of the Crizal family of AR coated uncut lenses will arrive ready for you to dispense to your patients the following day. With overnight delivery available across the country, most practices can dispense eyeglasses with AR and compete with next day quality service they can be proud of.

AR IS ONLY A COSMETIC TECHNOLOGY. AR technology adds so much more value to your patient's visual comfort and eye health than simple cosmetic ego enhancement. Depending on the AR you choose, this one technology adds all or most of these desired benefit enhancements to a patient's eyeglasses:

1. Anti-scratch, if purchased separately, would cost $15-$45 retail, and is included.
   

2. The superior clean-ability that comes with hydrophobic soil-resistant technology is usually not available as a separate benefit, but is included in almost all AR technologies.
   

3. Anti-finger-smudge technology is offered in many superior ARs, such as Alize and Avance brands of Crizal AR technology, and is not offered separately, but only as a benefit of superior ARs.
   

4. Anti-Static reduces dust collection on the eyeglass lenses, therefore diminishing the frequency of cleaning and the chance of scratching the lenses during cleaning. This benefit of enhanced visual acuity between lens cleanings is not available separately, but is included in superior AR technologies such as Essilor's Alize and Avance.
   

5. Some companies have attached brand names to their AR technologies that are designed to instill confidence in the consuming public of the value and superior protection afforded by their best AR's. Essilor has added Scotchgard protector to its Avance AR, and Zeiss/Sola has added the Teflon name to its best AR. The concept, for both the public and the practitioner, is that the quality of protection these brand names imply will differentiate these ARs from the negative memories of poor adhesion, poor clean-ability, and general dissatisfaction with early iterations of AR technology.
   

6. The benefit that is associated with the multi-layer technology of all ARs is glare reduction, especially apparent at night, which allows more of the diminished ambient light to enter the eye. This reduces double images and is especially helpful for the visual acuity of older patients. Ironically, it is most commonly these older patients that ECPs avoid dispensing AR to. Go figure.

AR WILL FOCUS NEGATIVE ATTENTION ON MY EYES. Not necessarily. I recommend Zeiss Cool mirror technology on Transitions lenses which distracts focus on eye details and includes all the above advantages of AR protective technology.

AR IS COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE ON TRANSITIONS AND POLARIZED LENSES. While AR increases light transmission on these lenses, it also reduces reflections back into the eye from harsh and bright sunlight. An important benefit of AR on Transitions lenses is that it speeds transition significantly faster as your patient goes from one light-intensity to another. That is a benefit your patients will value.

Only time will tell if the 40% dispense rate of AR technology in the U. S. will increase to the 80%-90% dispense rate that exists today in Japan and Europe. Twenty-five years ago the rate was 2%-20%. Today many of the practices I visit say they dispense AR on almost all their patient's eyeglasses. They don't ask patients if they want it. It is a benefit included in the price of the glasses.

If a patient needs both near and distance correction, do you ask each patient to choose among bifocal, trifocal, or the current advanced progressive technology? Do you now take the time to describe the features and benefits and costs of each technology? Or do you make the professional choice for them of a cosmetically superior no-line multi-focal. Do you assume it is visually better to have the range of focal lengths that are included in PAL technology, and have confidence that your patients will tell you if they do not want it? Why do so many of you treat AR technology differently?