I was taught that in the USA, phoroptors are mainly used for refraction, and in the UK, trial frames are the go. Here in Australia, it depends. I find the phoroptor really useful for refraction, and try and use it as much as possible. It is much easier for ret and less time consuming overall. However, there are some disadvantages associated with using the phoroptor: -Vertex distance inaccuracy for high Rx -Unco-operative and low vision patients (discomfort, moving their heads back and changing vertex distance) -Sometimes it's just psychological - seeing lenses physically being changed can give more accuracy -Prescribing near adds: despite the binocular cross cyl method, I think converging in downgaze seems a more natural reading position for the patient Now I know a lot (if not most!) of you on this forum are from the States...do you think the above reasons are valid? Am I wasting my time using the trial frame? Thanks!