I work in law enfocement in the Las Vegas area and my agency is starting to kick people out with vision worse than 20/200 uncorrected. I'm pretty sure I'm worse than that, with bonus astigmatism:
OD -6.75 +1.75 106
OS -7.25 +1.00 65

I am unsure of pupil diameter, and have slight dry eye now.

I am correctable to 20/20 now, and the inability to maintain that would certainly exclude me. Low light problems would be terrible for me as well.
They are advancing a policy that precludes these types of surgeries unless they are over a year old with no complications, so I may have to rush in before they sort through everyone. Can you shed light on why people with lasik would be such a risk?-- seems unwarranted.

Could you recommend someone in the Las Vegas area? I am interested in a surgeon who is highly skilled, willing to spend a few minutes addressing questions and concerns, and interested in patient welfare.

THANKS VERY MUCH! I appreciate that folks devote time to helping people out here.

First, you must have uncorrected vision of less than 20/200 given your level of refraction. Second, it is unlikely (although anything is remotely possible) that you would have a best corrected vision of less than 20/200 after surgery. Therefore, assuming no complications, you could still be "corrected" to appropriate vision levels with glasses if the surgery didn't give you all the vision you require. The issue of glare at night would be important given your level of nearsightedness. Your ophthalmologist will be checking your pupil size and review the risks/benefits with you. I find it odd that you police department has such a policy. The busiest part of my practice has been law enforcement officers and firemen. Should either of these professionals lose a contact lens in the middle of "chasing a bad guy" or being in the middle of a burning building, they could die. Each one of them tells me that they feel "safer" having had the surgery done and not have to worry about losing a contact lens or having their glasses fall off in the middle of an arrest. I know of some ophthalmologists in L.V. but none that I know personally and will defer to others on the panel who may be able to give you a referral.
Good luck.
Steven Ofner, M.D.
Eugene, Oregon
http://www.eugeneeyecare.com

Thanks for your reply. I'm actually in police and fire so the utility of better eyesight is pretty high for me.
Question: Will there be advances in the next year or two that one with some risk factors could really benefit from as opposed to getting some possible permanent deficits from current technology, or is that not possible to say or not a warranted concern for me?

I personally know Dr. Steve Hansen and would feel comfortable if he were operating on my eyes.

Thanks,

Robert Brems,M.D.

Thanks for the referral, I will look hom up.

Question: Will there be advances in technology in the next year or two that could really mitigate risks (permanent deficits) for my prescription/occupation, or is that not possible to say/ not a real concern for me?

There will always be incremental advances in the correction of myopia. Each year, I expect the results will be slightly better and the risks will be slightly less. However, for most people who are very interested in LASIK, the current technology provides excellent results with a low risk profile. You should certainly talk with your LASIK surgeon and discuss your expectations to see if LASIK is for you.

I will be happy to answer any future questions you may have.

Bill Trattler, MD
Miami, FL