I met 2 optometry students who were following an ophthalmologist. They are 4th year students. They lack of knowledge is scary. In about 9 months, they will be in the job market!

I was particularly shocked because they are starting their 4th year of training (they've finished 3 years). That's the same amount of eye training that I've had (3 years of ophthalmology just completed).
-----
Having only 5 months of clinical training by the beginning of the 4th year? That explains part of it. If this is true, optometrist (whose political leaders think that they are equivalent to MD's) need a longer curriculum. 4 years is too short. Another year would help.

The students couldn't identify a chalazion, even when asked to guess some possible answers. Too hard a question? For both of them? Maybe they are just slackers, not the norm?

so you're judging an ENTIRE profession based on two students !!!?? And, if you just met them they are just BARELY fourth years. that's all i have to say....

As discussed in multiple threads before, optometry and ophthalmology are very different. If you have just completed ophthalmological training, I can see how someone who is still in optometric training may seem inexperienced and lacking knowledge...I am sure that with more experience these guys will become excellent primary care eye doctors. Surgery, however, should be left to ophthalmologists.

I met 2 optometry students who were following an ophthalmologist. They are 4th year students. They lack of knowledge is scarry. In about 9 months, they will be in the job market!

I was particularly shocked because they are starting their 4th year of training (they've finished 3 years). That's the same amount of eye training that I've had (3 years of ophthalmology just completed).

Sam,

Fourth year is where the rubber meets the road in Optometry School. The first year doesn't actually have that much eye stuff in it. While the second year is better, the first and second year are mostly for preparing for Basic Science Boards (Part I).

The total clinic time (i.e. where things are actually learned and sink in) that these students have had probably amounts to 5 months. Remember what you knew after 5 months in clinic? The fourth year of Optometry school is full time (not resident full-time, of course) clinic. I imagine you feel you learned a substantial amount between the beginning of your first full clinic year and the end, and it will be that way for those students as well.

Also, did you ask those students to discuss contact lenses or binocular vision issues with you? Slab off? Tolerable amounts of aniseikonia and unequal cyl? Remember that we're not training to become junior OMDs, our training is different.

Also remember (apologies to Bill) that the plural of anecdote is not fact. We can all sit around and trade clueless OMD/clueless OD stories all day long.

Tom Stickel
Indiana U. 2001

p.s. Richard Scarry is a writer. It's scary. ;)

Sam-you have completed three years of opthalmalogy training + medical school (including optho rotations) and you are comparing yourself to optometry STUDENTS. They have not had the same amount of eye training as you. Similar to med school, optometry school's first two years is mostly basic science lecture. So in reality they have had about one year eye training not three. As a fourth year medical student I think residents forget how little they knew as students. :rolleyes:

Don't forget that there are MD residents that follow ODs around as well...some of them are just as smart (if not smarter) than some MDs!!

D

I can't stand being called an OMD. I went to medical school and received an MD degree, and apparantly when I matched into Ophthalmology, I must have received an O in front of my MD. I know that this argument has no true substance or meaning, but it is weird and somewhat annoying to be called OMD. I prefer ophthalmologist, eye surgeon, etc. Just personal preferance. Anyone else agree?

Also, on topic, I have mixed feelings about OD's as my previous posts would alude to. On one hand, ophthalmologists are lucky to have a group of practitioners in their field to handle a lot of the stuff that we don't want to deal with (refractions, contact lens fittings, etc.). It actually made ophthalmology more attractive to me. However, when some optometrists try to push the envelope and try to gain surgical rights, that enrages me. Just my two cents.

I met 2 optometry students who were following an ophthalmologist. They are 4th year students. They lack of knowledge is scary. In about 9 months, they will be in the job market!

I was particularly shocked because they are starting their 4th year of training (they've finished 3 years). That's the same amount of eye training that I've had (3 years of ophthalmology just completed).
-----
Having only 5 months of clinical training by the beginning of the 4th year? That explains part of it. If this is true, optometrist (whose political leaders think that they are equivalent to MD's) need a longer curriculum. 4 years is too short. Another year would help.

The students couldn't identify a chalazion, even when asked to guess some possible answers. Too hard a question? For both of them? Maybe they are just slackers, not the norm?

Having trained 4th year optometry externs in my practice for over 13 years, I can say without reservation that by the beginning of 4th year all OD students know what a chalazion is (even diffDx from Hordeolum).
--But my real comment is that this thread shows the gains we are making in the two professions working closer together. A thread beginning "OD Lack of Knowledge=Shocking" has such potential for more OD bashing. Yet all the threads respond with very correct analysis: This is a rare situation and not a reflection of the profession as a whole, nor even a student who has had a chance to 1. Finish school and 2. Gain Real Experience.
--There is hope. It is so refreshing. I will close with I too believe that surgery (by definition--not insurance coding) should be left to surgeons (OMD for those not offended by the shorthand abbreviation :) :)

Having trained 4th year optometry externs in my practice for over 13 years, I can say without reservation that by the beginning of 4th year all OD students know what a chalazion is (even diffDx from Hordeolum).
--But my real comment is that this thread shows the gains we are making in the two professions working closer together. A thread beginning "OD Lack of Knowledge=Shocking" has such potential for more OD bashing. Yet all the threads respond with very correct analysis: This is a rare situation and not a reflection of the profession as a whole, nor even a student who has had a chance to 1. Finish school and 2. Gain Real Experience.
--There is hope. It is so refreshing. I will close with I too believe that surgery (by definition--not insurance coding) should be left to surgeons (OMD for those not offended by the shorthand abbreviation :) :)

I was also very pleased that this thread didn't slip into a bashing session between the two groups. It's very easy to point out examples of people who did not have a particular piece of knowledge and generalize to the entire profession. Especially when they are students, even students in their last year of training. I recall when I used to teach ophthalmology residents about refraction, contact lenses and low vision, I had two residents in their final year who could not explain the difference between hyperopia and presbyopia and why a 25 year old 2 diopter hyperope would be expected to have 20/20 vision. Pointing out an ophthalmology resident who can't describe hyperopia or an optometry student who doesnt adequately describe a chalazion is hardly an indictment of the entire field on either side. I am also encouraged that the response was with the correct analysis.

Jenny

I met 2 optometry students who were following an ophthalmologist. They are 4th year students. They lack of knowledge is scary. In about 9 months, they will be in the job market!

I was particularly shocked because they are starting their 4th year of training (they've finished 3 years). That's the same amount of eye training that I've had (3 years of ophthalmology just completed).
-----
Having only 5 months of clinical training by the beginning of the 4th year? That explains part of it. If this is true, optometrist (whose political leaders think that they are equivalent to MD's) need a longer curriculum. 4 years is too short. Another year would help.

The students couldn't identify a chalazion, even when asked to guess some possible answers. Too hard a question? For both of them? Maybe they are just slackers, not the norm?


You're making generalizations based on your personal experience with two students who have yet to complete their degrees. Besides, you're also comparing apples to oranges. An optometrist should not be compared to an ophthalmologist because they serve two very different purposes and have vastly different levels of training.

I can't stand being called an OMD. I went to medical school and received an MD degree, and apparantly when I matched into Ophthalmology, I must have received an O in front of my MD. I know that this argument has no true substance or meaning, but it is weird and somewhat annoying to be called OMD. I prefer ophthalmologist, eye surgeon, etc. Just personal preferance. Anyone else agree?

Also, on topic, I have mixed feelings about OD's as my previous posts would alude to. On one hand, ophthalmologists are lucky to have a group of practitioners in their field to handle a lot of the stuff that we don't want to deal with (refractions, contact lens fittings, etc.). It actually made ophthalmology more attractive to me. However, when some optometrists try to push the envelope and try to gain surgical rights, that enrages me. Just my two cents.

Managed health care is causing many other practitioners to seek expansion of their scope of practice rights as well. PhD/PsyD psychologists with additional training in psychopharm are seeking RxPs, NPs and PAs are seeking enhanced authority, PharmDs are seeking RxPs, and optometrists in some states want to perform surgeries. Where will the line be drawn?

I recall when I used to teach ophthalmology residents about refraction, contact lenses and low vision, I had two residents in their final year who could not explain the difference between hyperopia and presbyopia and why a 25 year old 2 diopter hyperope would be expected to have 20/20 vision.

Jenny

Bullsh--

Bullsh--

Yeah, I smelt it too...

Yeah, I smelt it too...


uh-oh, i'm bracing for the "same recycled crap" lecture that is sure to follow....

uh-oh, i'm bracing for the "same recycled crap" lecture that is sure to follow....

OH Ruben, please NO. Don't tell me I spoke too soon.
It doesn't take "The DiVinci Code" to see that Doc plus Opt. and Ophth.
is symbolic coding for CO-OP, so why does cooperation remain the elusive "holy grail"?????

dear scott, (or should i refer to you as the dan brown of this forum?)

c'mon...me???? when have i ever bashed ODs? i too agree that ophthalmologists and optometrists form an important symbiotic realtionship and each has a unique and essential role in ocular health care. the purpose of my "same old recycled crap" warning is to illustrate that these arguments such as "one time this one optometry student couldn't tell me what such and such was" or "as a optometrist i have trained many ophthalmology residents and one time this one resident couldn't tell me what presbyopia was...so there" grow tiresome and lead to nothing of substance and lead to threads with titles such as "optometrists are a joke" or jaded posts that state that "the most arrogant people in this world are 4th year medical students going into ophthalmology and 1st year ophthalmology residents." the same people who have accused various people on this forum of perpetuating this "recycled crap" are just as guilty of it themselves. as much as i am glad that aphistis posts with less frequency on this forum, he made one of the best points by saying arguments based on anecdotal evidence are worthless. that's all i was saying or implying by my previous post. in summary, scott, i agree with you, but direct your post to the few that preceded mine rather than mine.

OH Ruben, please NO. Don't tell me I spoke too soon.
It doesn't take "The DiVinci Code" to see that Doc plus Opt. and Ophth.
is symbolic coding for CO-OP, so why does cooperation remain the elusive "holy grail"?????

dear scott, (or should i refer to you as the dan brown of this forum?)

c'mon...me???? when have i ever bashed ODs? i too agree that ophthalmologists and optometrists form an important symbiotic realtionship and each has a unique and essential role in ocular health care. the purpose of my "same old recycled crap" warning is to illustrate that these arguments such as "one time this one optometry student couldn't tell me what such and such was" or "as a optometrist i have trained many ophthalmology residents and one time this one resident couldn't tell me what presbyopia was...so there" grow tiresome and lead to nothing of substance and lead to threads with titles such as "optometrists are a joke" or jaded posts that state that "the most arrogant people in this world are 4th year medical students going into ophthalmology and 1st year ophthalmology residents." the same people who have accused various people on this forum of perpetuating this "recycled crap" are just as guilty of it themselves. as much as i am glad that aphistis posts with less frequency on this forum, he made one of the best points by saying arguments based on anecdotal evidence are worthless. that's all i was saying or implying by my previous post. in summary, scott, i agree with you, but direct your post to the few that preceded mine rather than mine.

Ruben
Somehow, my post got read as directed at your comments, I know from posting with you that you feel the same way I do.....cooperation is the only way to progress. My post was purely tongue-in-cheek --intended as a joke and play on words Co-op DOC and Op(t) blah blah blah. When I said I spoke to soon, I was comiserating WITH you regarding, "here we go again--same ole crap". If you inferred anything other than my total agreement with your comment and stupid "code" joking I deeply regret that. Just shows how we can intend harmless comments yet incite otherwise. I regret any aggravation I caused you, it certainly was the previous posts my comments were directed.---Scott

my bad, scott. perhaps i shouldn't post when i am post-call, waiting to sign-out. no apology needed.

Ruben
Somehow, my post got read as directed at your comments, I know from posting with you that you feel the same way I do.....cooperation is the only way to progress. My post was purely tongue-in-cheek --intended as a joke and play on words Co-op DOC and Op(t) blah blah blah. When I said I spoke to soon, I was comiserating WITH you regarding, "here we go again--same ole crap". If you inferred anything other than my total agreement with your comment and stupid "code" joking I deeply regret that. Just shows how we can intend harmless comments yet incite otherwise. I regret any aggravation I caused you, it certainly was the previous posts my comments were directed.---Scott

Whoever is upset about being called an OMD should really get over it. I think it is just a lot easier to type "OMD" and "OD" rather than "ophthalmology" and "optometry" each time. Don't judge students, everyone can have nervous times in the clinic when being pimped or sometimes even with simple questions. It doesn't mean you need to believe the whole upcoming class of newly trained ODs are a danger to society. One or two green apples does not mean the rest of the apple tree is not ready for the picking.

I met 2 optometry students who were following an ophthalmologist. They are 4th year students. They lack of knowledge is scary. In about 9 months, they will be in the job market!

I was particularly shocked because they are starting their 4th year of training (they've finished 3 years). That's the same amount of eye training that I've had (3 years of ophthalmology just completed).
-----
Having only 5 months of clinical training by the beginning of the 4th year? That explains part of it. If this is true, optometrist (whose political leaders think that they are equivalent to MD's) need a longer curriculum. 4 years is too short. Another year would help.

The students couldn't identify a chalazion, even when asked to guess some possible answers. Too hard a question? For both of them? Maybe they are just slackers, not the norm?

Wow That is really sad! But not the norm. I started clinical rotations in my 3rd semester (that's second year At UHCO)
We have a world class teaching facility with many MD's on staff. I even trained under Jade Shiffman and Rosa Tang, 2 leading Neuro-ophthomologists and who are consistantly ranked in the top physicans in Houston.
I would put my clinical skills against most.
Sadly...an MD COMPLELELY mis treated an elderly patient of mine who had glaucoma. He had him on steroids for 2 years and NEVER ONCE ordered a visual field. By the time he cam to me saying he couldn't see he was already blind OD and snuffing out OS. I changed his meds and see him every 3 months now (and a little more.) This particular case REALLY PISSED ME OFF because the patient was my GRANDFATHER!!!
So you see bad doctors are bad doctors..MD, OD, DO, whatever.
Do not mistake the entire profession because that is just plain ignorant.

M Hyde, OD