The doubts enumerated in an editorial by Crisp1 suggested the following presentation of and comments on cases of aniseikonia.
The patients who come for examination for aniseikonia have been well described by Post.2
[They are] only those whom he [the ophthalmologist] has failed to relieve with the usual lenses . . . and who, in general, . . . are bothered by ocular as well as other trivialities and often have exhausted his patience. Thus, the aniseikonic clinics have become the rendezvous of the most difficult patients for whom to obtain comfort. That anything good is accomplished for these patients is the miracle.
Crisp's first question was how large a proportion of the ocular difficulties apparently relieved by prescription for aniseikonia were capable of relief in no other way, and, second, what proportion could have been relieved by more complete accuracy in refractive measurements without the aid of size lenses.
Since September 1942 I
. . . [Full Text PDF of this Article]
