Robomarker: What are you currently using for alignment? A corneal marker of a digital system?

Corneal Marker

Digital System

click to edit

why Robo is better

Time

Money

Precision

Flexibility

BT: Your tech doesn't have to spend additional time on data input/ transferring data ffrom one system to another...AND You have to wait on the Ora to direct you blindly.

You can get the lens in place as it's unfolding because you already know where it's going to go...consistenty when placing with the method of averages, the ORA confirms that you got the implant the optimal position...yay!

Aquirement

BT: Digital marking systems are not 100% accurate, especially when depending on the results of one topo instrm. that may not reflect the true corneal cylinder over a range of optical zones...downfall of digital alignment systems is they only give you the alignment projection based on one method of measurement

BT:

BT: requires an acquisition instrument, usu meaning purchasing new office equipment...large expenditure/commitment

GR: Robo is significantly easier to foot off the front end, making it a much smaller investment overall and easier to say yes/have it said yes to

minimal - so portable it's wearable -

GR: Gravity - You know it's always going to work, and work right....in the rare case that you digital system goes down, you don't have to stop the case or your day of surgery or revert to less accurate traditional methods

GR: cheaper starting cost, but also cheaper to maintain

click to edit

precision

BT: Marking the eye a different way than you measure could be compounding any error! Wether you mark at the slit lamp or with a Mendez ring.

GR: Marking the same way you measure

Surgeons have the freedom to use the average corneal astigmatism value from multiple measurement acquisition instruments ..studies show this is better than using one measuring tool!

Bobby Osher supports the method of averages!!!

BT = bad traditional? GR= Good Robomarker