Positive Experiences
There aren't a great many such reviews in general as many of the reviews are from years and years ago.
Incidents
I found one review where the clinic acknowledged an incident, and many of the rest seem to have spoken to a call center on the phone which seems to have been less than helpful and didn't result in issue acknowledgement.
Multiple reviewers noted that follow up appointments were charged to patients. One said the follow up appointment wasn't charged, but they left the appointment feeling like they were blamed for the incident outcome from the surgery
Patients were not offered free appointments at a 3rd party facility. For example: "Everything about this experience was great. Until I realized I now have a severe light allergy which I've heard from others who gad this procedure. Called for solutions like a prescription for tint which I was told is something they can do, but there best answer was to go see my regular optometrist whom I haven't seen in 3 yrs who then basically laughed at the idea. So thank you for everything except for solutions to my problem. Really helpful before you pay then though. "
Most negative reviews are NOT incident reviews - they are patients saying their lifetime enhancement policy wasn't being followed, like this one: "I had lasik at whiting in 2019. I was assured the enchantment policy would follow after the clinic was sold. I just called and was told that whiting clinic filed for bankruptcy in 2020 and is no longer honoring the enhancement policy for past patients." Another reviewer said, of the transition: "The end result and customer service following has been a nightmare. When Whiting went through bankruptcy and LCA acquired the company it’s been an absolute mess. I’ve had issues with one eye and have spent the last year or more trying to get some sort of assistance to no avail. You’re directed to call centers and given the run around. After they have taken your money and given the provider, don it fall for the assurance of patient care they tell you post procedure. I don’t want any one else to have to go through this!" Regarding patients who did have the procedure done, one patient had a failed procedure and the clinic mishandled the follow up: "...They cancelled the procedure since they were not able to get the flap made. The amount of disapointment and frustration I felt and still feel is immeasurable. I had extremely irritated eyes and felt like I had been pepper sprayed. It took over a month for my eyes to look somewhat normal again. The cherry on top is that they charged me for the procedure and I am still trying to get a refund. I understand there are risks involved with this procedure, but it does not make up for the horrible experience I had."
TreatScore Methodology
TreatScore tries to objectively rate providers using publicly available data. TreatCost's commentary should not affect TreatScore.
Positive Experience Weight: 85%
In a study finished in 2011, 95% of patients were satisfied their LASIK eye surgery. We want to reflect this in our scoring.
New technology like Contoura / Wavefront, ICL, and other types of vision correction surgery may result in even higher positive outcome rates. Given this and the large number of online reviews of LASIK available, we feel star ratings and comments from consumer review sites like Google Maps are the best representation of LASIK quality when surgery is successful. For centers which only perform LASIK and related surgeries, we use every rating in the score. For locations which perform more types of ophthalmic surgery and other types of vision appointments, we consider both their overall rating (50%) and the rating for patients who mention LASIK, PRK, or a related surgery in their review (50%).
Incident Management Weight: 15%
Although only a small fraction of patients have negative outcomes from LASIK, the disproportionate effects from a failed surgery mean we give them a disproportionately higher weight.
Our goal is to convey how well (or poorly) your case would be handled if your surgery failed. To that end, our Incident ratings are calculated from 3 equally weighed elements:
- Incident acknowledgement: Whether the provider acknowledges incidents
- Second surgery offer: Whether the provider tries to fix failed surgeries for patients at no cost to the patient
- 3rd party offer: Whether the provider refers patients to a 3rd party for a surgical or other fix at no cost to the patient
Why do we use these criteria?
- Incident acknowledgement: To receive remediative care patients must know such care is available. If a provider acknowledges an incident early, that can help patients
- Second surgery offer: We have reviewed hundreds of LASIK reviews, and in many cases providers offer to fix failed surgeries with a subsequent surgery. Because many providers offer this service, we assume it is effective and we include it in our Incident Management review. If the provider refers all patients to a 3rd party at no cost to the patient then they get a perfect score
- 3rd party offer: In reviewing dozens of patient incident stories, we found many patients refused to allow their original surgeon to operate on them again for fear of a second failure. For these patients, we know they often seek a 3rd party service to help them, and in TreatCost's opinion the original provider should pay for that service
These criteria are not comprehensive. TreatScore includes multiple data sources, but we do not always include every piece of information in our score. TreatScore is intended to be a starting point to help patients understand the experiences of other patients, so all calculations are based on patient reviews and patient incident reports. If you are a provider and want to improve your score, we recommend asking patients who experience an incident to post their experience online and then send TreatCost.com a link to this content via our Feedback Form.
Disclaimers and Warnings
I am not a doctor. MN law prohibits referral payments. Gregory Ledray owns & operates treatcost.com.
This review is not medical advice and was not created by a physician. Each patient is unique, so any descriptions or statistics of medical care, devices, or other information can not predict an individual patient's experience. Patients seeking advice on their unique health situation should seek the advice of a physician.