Do you support Optometrists doing surgery? - ODs allowed to do scalpel surgery in OK!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Do you support Optometrists doing surgery?

  • Absolutely No: MD/DO/medical student

    Votes: 823 58.8%
  • Absolutely No: Optometrist/Optometry student

    Votes: 39 2.8%
  • Absolutely No: All others

    Votes: 147 10.5%
  • Yes w/ proper optometry "surgical fellowships": MD/DO/medical student

    Votes: 115 8.2%
  • Yes w/ proper optometry "surgical fellowships": Optometrist/Optometry student

    Votes: 107 7.6%
  • Yes w/ proper optometry "surgical fellowships": All others

    Votes: 61 4.4%
  • Absolutely Yes: MD/DO/medical student

    Votes: 13 0.9%
  • Absolutely Yes: Optometrist/Optometry student

    Votes: 27 1.9%
  • Absolutely Yes: All others

    Votes: 22 1.6%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 46 3.3%

  • Total voters
    1,400
Hey Andy,

I wonder if it would be worthwhile to somehow get all ophtho programs to purchase the Profession of Ophthalmology book along with the BCS. This will definitely help in terms political advocacy, for 1/3 of the book is dedicated to that.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Ocular Surgery News, August 15 2005, page 5, has a good article on the OK isssue - I am not able to cut and paste it on this site - maybe someone else will have better luck.
 
If they have received enough training, they probably will anyways. I wouldn't trust a non-physician because where's his/her backing coming from. Just because he/she is trained doesn't mean the practitioner is certified in it.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
As I am an OD this is what I think.
I think anOD who wants to do surg. should mabey have to follow the same course as oral surgeons. They should attend some medical school and apply to an ophth residency. I think surgery should be performed by competent skilled surgeons.

are you suprised by my response?

Dr. M Hyde
 
Andrew_Doan said:
I agree. We need to work together. Let's draw the line at surgery defined by leaders from both sides who can think outside the box. I am not talking about epilations and FB removal. We all know what surgeries I am talking about so please don't reply and argue about FB removal. In return for backing down from surgery, ophthalmologists will share their knowledge to strengthen optometrists' primary care skills.

I promise to help unite the fields, but we will need to do this as a team. Any young leaders with vision browsing SDN? Any leaders who are ready to take action rather than be passive thinkers?


I think you are correct. I believe we should work together.
 
drmhyde said:
As I am an OD this is what I think.
I think anOD who wants to do surg. should mabey have to follow the same course as oral surgeons. They should attend some medical school and apply to an ophth residency. I think surgery should be performed by competent skilled surgeons.

are you suprised by my response?

Dr. M Hyde
The oral surgeon-esque route has been discussed extensively, and I think there's at least a fragile consensus emerging that dentistry & optometry are sufficiently different that the model would, at the very least, require extensive modification in order to produce adequately trained optometrist surgeons.
 
aphistis said:
The oral surgeon-esque route has been discussed extensively, and I think there's at least a fragile consensus emerging that dentistry & optometry are sufficiently different that the model would, at the very least, require extensive modification in order to produce adequately trained optometrist surgeons.

What makes it sufficently different? Just wondering because I've taken extensive general pharmocology, ocular pharm, and even a couple of courses on molecular mechinisms of apoptisis. That along with gross anatomy, Physiology, Neuro-anatomy, Neuro-phys., psyhcophysics and perception, ocular anatomy and physiology, several classes on general pathology and medicine and ocular pathology and medicine, biochem, etc. plus I have a BS in Biology and Chemistry...does that mean were not as educated...hmm.
just wondering
 
drmhyde said:
What makes it sufficently different? Just wondering because I've taken extensive general pharmocology, ocular pharm, and even a couple of courses on molecular mechinisms of apoptisis. That along with gross anatomy, Physiology, Neuro-anatomy, Neuro-phys., psyhcophysics and perception, ocular anatomy and physiology, several classes on general pathology and medicine and ocular pathology and medicine, biochem, etc. plus I have a BS in Biology and Chemistry...does that mean were not as educated...hmm.
just wondering
With all due respect, Dr. Hyde, this has been discussed to death on several threads. Rather than rehashing it here, I would suggest reading those. If you still want to engage in this discussion after all that reading, be my guest.
 
drmhyde said:
What makes it sufficently different? Just wondering because I've taken extensive general pharmocology, ocular pharm, and even a couple of courses on molecular mechinisms of apoptisis. That along with gross anatomy, Physiology, Neuro-anatomy, Neuro-phys., psyhcophysics and perception, ocular anatomy and physiology, several classes on general pathology and medicine and ocular pathology and medicine, biochem, etc. plus I have a BS in Biology and Chemistry...does that mean were not as educated...hmm.
just wondering
With all due respect, Dr. Hyde, I'll thank you to realize I described dentistry as different, not superior. Summarized, the difference is that dentistry is by its very nature a surgical profession, and optometry is not. A slightly more fleshed-out version can be found here, but as Dr. Chudner mentions above, the topic has been discussed to the verge of depletion.
 
aphistis said:
With all due respect, Dr. Hyde, I'll thank you to realize I described dentistry as different, not superior. Summarized, the difference is that dentistry is by its very nature a surgical profession, and optometry is not. A slightly more fleshed-out version can be found here, but as Dr. Chudner mentions above, the topic has been discussed to the verge of depletion.
I agree with just about everything you say in your link. Let me note that as it stands now..I really don't want to do surgery. But...if there was a program that allowed one to become competent in the skill of surgery...be it as rigourous as it needs be..then I would be in my collegues corner to do so. To be more specific..I think the type of surgery we are talking about is not cataract extraction or retinal surgery, but rather refractive proceedures and posterior capsulotomy which the latter a trained monkey could do. We already posess the skill to use a slit lamp and hold a lens steady. I think I can muster enough skill and dexterity to push the "fire" button. I'm an 80's child...I ruled on atari, sega, intellivision, etc. I think I can handle it. I've personally fired the laser in labs on helpless bunnies. (well not so helpless if you ever saw Monty Python's Holy Grail....run away...run away!!)
What I really hope happens is both professions come together, work together, and figure this all out. It's really more of a political and "pocket book protection" issue. As for me...I have WONDERFUL MD's I refer and co-manage with and have nothing but great things to say about 99% of the MD's I've met.

M HYde, OD
 
Andrew_Doan said:
"lasix" is the loop-diuretic pill. LASIK is surgery. It may appear simple, but there is more to it than 'pushing a button'. The decision making process in determining good surgical candidates require extensive training and understanding of surgical principals.

Read this thread: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=66061

BTW, the OK law is talking about real surgery, but it appears none will be granted by the current Governor. The law is written to allow introduction of incisional surgery, e.g. cataracts, with the OK Board of Optometry having control over optometric surgery.

Is the price of cheap LASIK really that important to you that you're willing to risk a life-time of visual disability?

Yes...there are principles that govern who makes a good candidate. Pachymetry, corneal topgraphy, wave-front analysis to discover higher order aberations, cycloplegic refraction, a through internal dilated exam to rule out retinal disease and glaucoma and especially clinical manifistations of corneal degenerative disease must be looked at. We do all this!
I've personally worked in a LASIK clinic...who the heck do you think does all the pre and post ops...I DID!!! And who has the skill and understanding of physics, light and refraction?? An OD...who spends 4 years mercilessly enduring Geometrical Physiological Optics classess. We're damn near physicists. Who better to understand refractive problems??
So you're telling me MD's haven't been sued into oblivion for not catching that case of plucid marginal degeneration leading to post-surgical corneal ectasia??(that award was in the MILLIONS)
Who are you fooling? Not me.
And the cheap LASIK remark...you've only got yourselves to blame on that one.
A wise MD (ophthomology) professer at my university once told me:
"Optometry is a trade that has become a profession..and sadly ophthomology is a profession that is becoming a trade." So ya'll come on down for LASIK..This month half off!! 12 months 0% financing!! ( I saw that one in last weeks newspaper)
 
drmhyde said:
Yes...there are principles that govern who makes a good candidate. Pachymetry, corneal topgraphy, wave-front analysis to discover higher order aberations, cycloplegic refraction, a through internal dilated exam to rule out retinal disease and glaucoma and especially clinical manifistations of corneal degenerative disease must be looked at. We do all this!
I've personally worked in a LASIK clinic...who the heck do you think does all the pre and post ops...I DID!!! And who has the skill and understanding of physics, light and refraction?? An OD...who spends 4 years mercilessly enduring Geometrical Physiological Optics classess. We're damn near physicists. Who better to understand refractive problems??
So you're telling me MD's haven't been sued into oblivion for not catching that case of plucid marginal degeneration leading to post-surgical corneal ectasia??(that award was in the MILLIONS)
Who are you fooling? Not me.
And the cheap LASIK remark...you've only got yourselves to blame on that one.
A wise MD (ophthomology) professer at my university once told me:
"Optometry is a trade that has become a profession..and sadly ophthomology is a profession that is becoming a trade." So ya'll come on down for LASIK..This month half off!! 12 months 0% financing!! ( I saw that one in last weeks newspaper)

Wow, last week you wanted to work for an graduating ophthalmologist and were searching for a job on this website. Since then, you sure have done a good job at selling yourself. :confused: I'm sure you will get many replies or offers now! Good job.

P.S. Learn how to spell Ophthalmology,this might piss your boss off.
 
I2I said:
Wow, last week you wanted to work for an graduating ophthalmologist and were searching for a job on this website. Since then, you sure have done a good job at selling yourself. :confused: I'm sure you will get many replies or offers now! Good job.

P.S. Learn how to spell Ophthalmology,this might piss your boss off.
Yeah..well I'm actually at work and my typing skills are surely something to be worked on. (you should see my handwriting..man that REALLY sucks!) ;) As for working for an MD that was never the question..it was a mutual partnership which works well in many prcatices. I actually run 2 practices on my own now and quite frankly I'm burning out. My intent was not to inflame anyone..although many have been QUIK to demean and criticize us. I just get excited when I see my profession bashed. I also am a bit of a smart ass and can be taken the wrong way. I appoligize if I offended anyone. Sometimes I post to quickly. As for getting a response..yeah it's been lacking..but I'm confident I will find someone soon. Most of my friends are actually MD's. My best friend is a spinal/orthopedic surgon and my brother in law is a plastic surgon in Az. Both are on the look out for me as well.
My desire is to do primary care and pediatric and low vision work. Actually, there is a wonderfull retinal specialist I may work with but we're just not sure if we want to stay here. Houston is where we really want to be. So...he who has never mis-spelled or typo'ed before...let him cast the first stone!!!
(I believe Jesus ACTUALLY said that..ok he didn't...I'm just paraphrasing)
 
Members don't see this ad :)
drmhyde said:
Yeah..well I'm actually at work and my typing skills are surely something to be worked on. (you should see my handwriting..man that REALLY sucks!) ;) As for working for an MD that was never the question..it was a mutual partnership which works well in many prcatices. I actually run 2 practices on my own now and quite frankly I'm burning out. My intent was not to inflame anyone..although many have been QUIK to demean and criticize us. I just get excited when I see my profession bashed. I also am a bit of a smart ass and can be taken the wrong way. I appoligize if I offended anyone. Sometimes I post to quickly. As for getting a response..yeah it's been lacking..but I'm confident I will find someone soon. Most of my friends are actually MD's. My best friend is a spinal/orthopedic surgon and my brother in law is a plastic surgon in Az. Both are on the look out for me as well.
My desire is to do primary care and pediatric and low vision work. Actually, there is a wonderfull retinal specialist I may work with but we're just not sure if we want to stay here. Houston is where we really want to be. So...he who has never mis-spelled or typo'ed before...let him cast the first stone!!!
(I believe Jesus ACTUALLY said that..ok he didn't...I'm just paraphrasing)

Sorry, we hurt your feelings...maybe if ODs were not trying to buy the right to surgery, prescriptions, etc. through lobbying we would be on better terms. If you can't take these comments about your profession, then go to the optometry forum where you belong and let the big boys talk. Stop crying. ;)
We having been talking about these subjects for awhile. Try searching for comments to your arguments, because they have been stated over and over and over again.
 
I2I said:
Sorry, we hurt your feelings...maybe if ODs were not trying to buy the right to surgery, prescriptions, etc. through lobbying we would be on better terms. If you can't take these comments about your profession, then go to the optometry forum where you belong and let the big boys talk. Stop crying. ;)
We having been talking about these subjects for awhile. Try searching for comments to your arguments, because they have been stated over and over and over again.
oh don't you worry...me big boy too..I can take it. I just bought websters dictionary so I can now spell Opthamology! Thank god! whew!! You saved me. Anyway...if we weren't arguing..what fun would it be? besidesI just joined the board..I actually work all day and can't possibly read all the old threads..I just saw this title and hey...I went with it. How long have you been practicing? You know..most MD's in prcatice a while that I have met actually don't seem to care as much. It's mostly students. Don't worry..the pie is big my friend and MD's will ALWAYS be in demand because they are just that damn good at what they do..I punt to them a lot. They send people back to me (gasp..oh th horror!) We actully even go to dinner (god forbid!) with our families no doubt. I even saw a concert (sting) with a opthaamoollooigrstr (did I spell that right?)
I just thought it was interesting that a dentist...and a probabbly damn good one too quickly points out why they can and we can't. Funny aren't you guys trying to stop them too?? Where's the love on that one? Just wondering..oh yeah..my dad can beat up your dad...so there! :cool:
 
drmhyde said:
oh don't you worry...me big boy too..I can take it. I just bought websters dictionary so I can now spell Opthamology! Thank god! whew!! You saved me. Anyway...if we weren't arguing..what fun would it be? besidesI just joined the board..I actually work all day and can't possibly read all the old threads..I just saw this title and hey...I went with it. How long have you been practicing? You know..most MD's in prcatice a while that I have met actually don't seem to care as much. It's mostly students. Don't worry..the pie is big my friend and MD's will ALWAYS be in demand because they are just that damn good at what they do..I punt to them a lot. They send people back to me (gasp..oh th horror!) We actully even go to dinner (god forbid!) with our families no doubt. I even saw a concert (sting) with a opthaamoollooigrstr (did I spell that right?)
I just thought it was interesting that a dentist...and a probabbly damn good one too quickly points out why they can and we can't. Funny aren't you guys trying to stop them too?? Where's the love on that one? Just wondering..oh yeah..my dad can beat up your dad...so there! :cool:
actually..no my dad probabbly can't..hes old and a retired chaplin..but he can pray much more fervantly than your dad!
 
I2I said:
Try searching for comments to your arguments, because they have been stated over and over and over again.

For additional threads discussing this issue:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=139902
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=161390
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=118416
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=123985
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=117800
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=113953

We don't need more surgeons. If we did, then I will do more cataract surgeries. ;)

Truthfully, both sides are protecting themselves financially. Surgeons are trying to maintain their income and optometrists want to make more money. Without a need for more surgeons, however, I cannot see how optometric surgeons will contribute to society.

IF we needed more surgeons, then I am sure you'll see first an increase in residency training positions for MDs and DOs than spots opening up for optometrists.

I believe optometrists are valuable team members in the delivery of ophthalmic primary care. Let's all do a good job in our roles and deliver excellent care for our patients.

BTW, I don't care about my surgical numbers because I am a salaried employee of the US NAVY. For me, this is purely a patient-safety issue.
 
Well gee guys this is fun...here's a real fun one to do. Now that we are encroching on your turf..watch this.
Ask an OD what they think about opticians gaining refraction priviliges :eek:

Oh crap...it's gonna hit the fan now.
Watch for the certain hypocrisy!!! :smuggrin:

This is fun!
 
drmhyde said:
oh don't you worry...me big boy too..I can take it. I just bought websters dictionary so I can now spell Opthamology! Thank god! whew!! You saved me. Anyway...if we weren't arguing..what fun would it be? besidesI just joined the board..I actually work all day and can't possibly read all the old threads..I just saw this title and hey...I went with it. How long have you been practicing? You know..most MD's in prcatice a while that I have met actually don't seem to care as much. It's mostly students. Don't worry..the pie is big my friend and MD's will ALWAYS be in demand because they are just that damn good at what they do..I punt to them a lot. They send people back to me (gasp..oh th horror!) We actully even go to dinner (god forbid!) with our families no doubt. I even saw a concert (sting) with a opthaamoollooigrstr (did I spell that right?)
I just thought it was interesting that a dentist...and a probabbly damn good one too quickly points out why they can and we can't. Funny aren't you guys trying to stop them too?? Where's the love on that one? Just wondering..oh yeah..my dad can beat up your dad...so there! :cool:

your silly...and you like RUSH :laugh:
 
I2I said:
your silly...and you like RUSH :laugh:

Like??? ohh no sir...

I bow down to the blessed Canadian Trinity....
you see...they ARE the PRIESTS, of the Temple of Syrinx,
and all the gifts of life...are held within thier walls! :cool:
 
Wow, someone has way too much caffeine...or perhaps they just forgot to take their meds. Chill out
 
I am an MD student (RWJMS) and my girlfriend is an OD student (NECO), so I have a unique (I believe priviledged) perspective. I generally believe that OD's shouldn't be doing surgery (as does she), but here I will provide facts, not opinions, on the matter.

1. Optometrists don't want surgery.

Yup, it may be hard to believe, but they don't. OD's care about primary eye care, vision therapy, and general clinical care for ocular disease, but they do not concern themselves with surgery. The AOA-PAC agenda does not include getting OD's to do surgery - they are more concerned about getting plano contacts by Rx only, and getting reimbursed by medicare (which my AMA has decided to make difficult for them). Most OD's would have gone to medical school and became ophthalmologists, but they didn't, because that's not what they want.

2. The reason for the Oklahoma situation.

Not enough ophthalmologists. If you want to improve the situation as an ophthalmologist, then move there. As it is now, many patients can't get surgery because of the shortage. The response was to allow OD's to perform laser procedures for retinopathy, take some of the case load off of the ophthalmologists. This is the ONLY procedure approved for them to do in OK.

3. OD's aren't taking over ophthalmology.

When maxillofacial surgery came about, ophthalmologists thought they were screwed. When OD's got Rx powers (they couldn't even dilate pupils!), ophthalmologists thought they were screwed. Ophthalmology is still one of the most lucrative and competitive residencies out there - you have nothing to worry about. Some of my ophthalmology-bound classmates were concerned that OD's were taking over surgery. This is simply not the case. They won't get it in NJ, because we have plenty of trained ophthalmologists. And the OD's don't want it. They like being optometrists.

4. The best thing is for optometrists and ophthalmologists to work together.

OD's are well trained in their very rigorous 4 years (more rigorous than medical school). They are also trained to "refer to ophthalmology" for everything they don't do. The best optometrists form relationships with ophthalmologists to provide the best care for their patients; those ophthalmologists refer back to give their patients the best primary care. When ophthalmologists and optometrists work together, everyone wins.

Now for my opinions:
I personally have had three eye surgeries (strabismus), and would never let an OD do that kind of thing - their not trained for it. My girlfriend feels the same way. But, in general, optometrists are much better providers of primary eye care than ophthalmologists. They are better trained in it, and they do it more. During 22 years with my ophthalmologist, I never had a manual phoropter refraction - surprise surprise when my VA improved after one exam with the OD (actually OD student).
As for laser surgery, most of it can be done and learned quite easily. OD's have an extremely good knowledge base for this, so I have no problem allowing a residency (yes, OD's have residencies) for laser surgery, especially when it is tied so closely into primary care (i.e. Lasik).
As for comments made by Dr. Paul Romano, editor and publisher of Binoc Vision and Strabismus Quarterly, OD's are very intelligent, talented, capable, and competant - no less so than MD's. They go through excellent training and are very good eyecare providers. Most of them could have gone to medical school and became ophthalmologists if they wanted to. But they don't, so leave it alone.
 
Someone mentioned that AAO doesn't allow OD's in lectures anymore. I can understand to a degree why that's the case, although you shouldn't have so much to hide, and if you do, there's a problem there. But, the AAO goes even further: they won't let OD's attend the conference at all. EVEN if the OD had a poster accepted, they aren't allowed to register, attend, and present/defend that poster - this happened to a professor I know. This is utter hypocrisy. Someone who contributes to the field of ophthalmology should be allowed to go the conference - distribution of knowledge to all professionals benefits all. Unless you're paranoid.

I want to be a neurologist. I love neurosurgery and go to many lectures to learn about the procedures. Same with anestesiology (I was working on a project involving neurology, neurosurgery, and anesthesia). The clinician who knows the procedure, how it is done, what it can do, does a better job in referring for that procedure and managing pre and post operatively. It doesn't mean that when I'm a neurologist I'm going to try to do neurosurgery. Same should be considered for OD's.
 
modisrules said:
2. The reason for the Oklahoma situation.

Not enough ophthalmologists. If you want to improve the situation as an ophthalmologist, then move there. As it is now, many patients can't get surgery because of the shortage. The response was to allow OD's to perform laser procedures for retinopathy, take some of the case load off of the ophthalmologists. This is the ONLY procedure approved for them to do in OK.


Dear modisrules,
I like some of your opinions and suggestions and I do believe that you are in a unique position given that your sig other is an OD. BUT, I think you should add to your above list the greed of a select few (BUT NOT ALL) optometrists. They were pushing for a lot more than laser procedures for retinopathy my friend and if i recall, their attempt to gain OR privileges had little to do with "taking the case load off" of ophthalmologists to benefit all of those poor pts that didn't have access to ocular surgery but more to do with "taking cases" for a self-serving financial interest of a SELECT FEW. It has and always will have everything to do with $

modisrules said:
3. OD's aren't taking over ophthalmology..


You're right, the three O's, remember?


modisrules said:
4. The best thing is for optometrists and ophthalmologists to work together.

:thumbup:
 
Thanks Ruben,

I will concede that there are a few OD's that are self-serving and pushing for priviledges they don't deserve for the extra $$$. My main point is that the very large majority of OD's are not in this category, but it seems that the AAO has generalized the interests of few to attack many. This "ad hoc" laser training is simply unacceptable. That said, I still think OD's have considerable training to prepare them for graduate study in some laser surgery - but they need to develop a residency program for it. Given this occurs, I don't think there's anything wrong with OD's making a little extra money; but then again, I'm probably not going to be an ophthalmologist.
 
modisrules said:
Someone mentioned that AAO doesn't allow OD's in lectures anymore. I can understand to a degree why that's the case, although you shouldn't have so much to hide, and if you do, there's a problem there. But, the AAO goes even further: they won't let OD's attend the conference at all. EVEN if the OD had a poster accepted, they aren't allowed to register, attend, and present/defend that poster - this happened to a professor I know. This is utter hypocrisy.

I think you're somebody who's heard quite a bit of the OD's side of the argument, and much less of the ophthalmologists' side of the argument. You seem to be parroting comments I hear from OD's, and not even touching on the arguments of the Eye MD's. BTW, just b/c you're in med school doesn't mean you know anything about ophtho. Most med students have very little exposure.

However, to respond to the above quote, the ophthalmologists had a good reason for their actions. OD's were using their attendance at the conference as a way to tell state legislature's that they were competent to do surgery. So the blame falls just as much on the OD's as the MD's. Afterall, after the fiasco in Oklahoma, do you really think most eye md's are you going to be as naive as you are and sit around listening to this "we don't really want to do surgery" BS? That might be very true for many OD's, but it's just as untrue for many other OD's. If ophthalmologists don't bother protecting their turf, including surgery, OD's will keep pushing for it.
 
modisrules said:
I want to be a neurologist. I love neurosurgery and go to many lectures to learn about the procedures. Same with anestesiology (I was working on a project involving neurology, neurosurgery, and anesthesia). The clinician who knows the procedure, how it is done, what it can do, does a better job in referring for that procedure and managing pre and post operatively. It doesn't mean that when I'm a neurologist I'm going to try to do neurosurgery. Same should be considered for OD's.

Great analogy, except for a few things. For example, neurologists aren't paying lots of money to state politicians in order to gain brain surgery rights. You're gf has done a good job brainwashing you.
 
modisrules said:
As for laser surgery, most of it can be done and learned quite easily. OD's have an extremely good knowledge base for this, so I have no problem allowing a residency (yes, OD's have residencies) for laser surgery, especially when it is tied so closely into primary care (i.e. Lasik).

Since when is LASIK tied into primary care? I mean, family doc's routinely do breast exams, but I'll be damned If I send someone to a family doc for a boob job. Anyway, there is no need for OD's to do residencies so that they can cherry pick the ophtho surgical procedures that you think are "easy". There are enough Ophthalmologists to supply the demand. Well, no need except to perhaps line their own pockets. As far as your statement that most OD's could have gone to medical school and matched Ophthalmology, I think that statement is a little misguided. Even if half of the OD students had stats for US allopathic schools, you usually have to be in the top 10-20 percent of your medical school to match Ophtho...you do the math. I applaud your effort to try to give an objective perspective, and you tried very hard...but don't worry, this isn't the first, and won't be the last time that a man was led astray by a woman ;)
 
I've followed this thread off and on for a while and other forums of discussion on the Surgery by Surgeons topic. I'd like to offer a comment in this respect.

I agree with Dr. Hyde. Any OD who desires to shift their career into a surgical field would be welcomed warmly to medical school and ophthalmology residency. Any competent, trained and licensed surgeon is welcome to perform surgery.

With regards to surprise, I'm not surprised with Dr. Hyde's point of view on this point. I've had the chance to work with many outstanding optometrists both before medical school and in residency training. I find that the vast majority feel as does Dr. Hyde---proud of their skills and the service that they provide to appreciative patients, but respectful of the difference in the scope of practice between great optometrists and great ophthalmologists.

I look forward to checking in periodically and communicating on this and other threads in the future.


drmhyde said:
As I am an OD this is what I think.
I think anOD who wants to do surg. should mabey have to follow the same course as oral surgeons. They should attend some medical school and apply to an ophth residency. I think surgery should be performed by competent skilled surgeons.

are you suprised by my response?

Dr. M Hyde
 
Sledge2005 said:
OD's were using their attendance at the conference as a way to tell state legislature's that they were competent to do surgery.

If this alone got OD's surgery, that's a serious problem, and the weight this kind of argument needs to be addressed. It's not the attendance that's the problem here - it's claiming the attendance supports competance and accepting such claims as valid that's the problem.

As I said previously, I think OD's need a surgical residency to be competent for surgery. And I do understand where the AAO is coming from, given the climate of the situation, but I think banning all OD's from all programs is a little extreme. I would guess that much research presented at these conferences is relevent to optometry, and withholding the knowledge, especially from those who directly contribute to that knowledge, is wrong on many levels.


BTW, I mistyped in an earlier post saying that 'most' OD's could have by ophtho's, which someone pointed out is not a likely situation. I meant to type 'many' - apologies for the typo and kudos to those keeping me straight. Keep 'em coming baby!
 
modisrules said:
2. The reason for the Oklahoma situation.

Not enough ophthalmologists. If you want to improve the situation as an ophthalmologist, then move there. As it is now, many patients can't get surgery because of the shortage. The response was to allow OD's to perform laser procedures for retinopathy, take some of the case load off of the ophthalmologists. This is the ONLY procedure approved for them to do in OK.
Just a clarification. To my knowledge, OD's in OK can NOT perform posterior segment lasers. Therefore OD's are not performing laser procedures for retinopathy. The law allows them to perform only anterior seg procedures such as ALT's, PI's, Yag Cap's, and PRK.

Also, I have a question that I hope the OMD's can answer. I have heard the arguement that OD's have used their attendance at your meetings to help gain a broader scope of practice, yet my friends in various states that have been involved in testifying in front of their state legislators (including OK) have said this is not true. According to them, there has never been an OD who has testified that OD's go to the same CE courses as MD's and therefore should be allowed to increase their scope. The American Optometric Association has said this was the excuse your AOA used to ban the OD's as retaliation for expanded scope. I don't know who is telling the truth, so I am asking those that have posted on this thread about what OD's have said regarding your meetings to please provide me with the link that has the testimony transcript so that this can be settled once and for all.
 
I have a simple question...what is the stance of insurance about proceedures performed by these optometrists? I assume they must have their own insurance. Why aren't their patients suing them for millions and increasing their premiums to astronomical heights? I'd think that this could be a way to deter this unless they somehow have better relationships with optometrists than medical insurance does with ophthalmologists.

I work in a rural area and the level of competance runs a broad range of completely incompetant (sending me a nine year old with COMPLETELY NORMAL eye exam after scaring the s### out of them by telling them she has retinoblastoma or EYE CANCER!) to very competant (efficiently managing straightforward glaucoma, minimal BDR and prompt referrals to ophthalmology as needed). However, many DO NOT TRUST me to send cataract patients back to them lickety split so they can collect post-op care fees which would be free and part of cataract surgery fees paid by insurance if done by myself. It goes to show there is a great divide between optometry and opthalmology that doesn't bode well for any compromise or good working relationships in general.
 
shiro1 said:
I have a simple question...what is the stance of insurance about proceedures performed by these optometrists? I assume they must have their own insurance. Why aren't their patients suing them for millions and increasing their premiums to astronomical heights? I'd think that this could be a way to deter this unless they somehow have better relationships with optometrists than medical insurance does with ophthalmologists.

Look at it this way, how many MDs do you hear getting sued over YAGs? Not too many. Same reason those Oklahoma ODs probably aren't getting sued very much. I'm not saying I agree or disagree with them doing the surgery, just that its not a hot lawsuit area at present.
But, I tend to think that malpractice for ODs doing surgery probably is higher than for OD who aren't doing surgery.

shiro1 said:
I work in a rural area and the level of competance runs a broad range of completely incompetant (sending me a nine year old with COMPLETELY NORMAL eye exam after scaring the s### out of them by telling them she has retinoblastoma or EYE CANCER!) to very competant (efficiently managing straightforward glaucoma, minimal BDR and prompt referrals to ophthalmology as needed). However, many DO NOT TRUST me to send cataract patients back to them lickety split so they can collect post-op care fees which would be free and part of cataract surgery fees paid by insurance if done by myself. It goes to show there is a great divide between optometry and opthalmology that doesn't bode well for any compromise or good working relationships in general.

The range of competence issue is currently being addressed by many state OD boards. All the older ODs that are not licensed at the highest levels are being required to either up their licence, or leave practice. I know its frustrating now, but it'll get better as newer and better trained ODs enter the field.
As for the post-op thing, 2 thoughts. First, the trust part is an old habit from back in the day when very very few MDs sent surgery patients back to their OD. As above, this habit is dying out... just give it some time. Second, I thought post-op fees were included, but could be separated, from the surgery fee. I know that with medicare, there is a special code for "surgery services only" and another for "post-op care". Obviously the MD would use the first, the OD the second. Many insurance plans (like medicaid), do not allow for this separation so I tend to think it would be illegal to separate the fee out like you are suggesting. Might be worth looking into.
 
shiro1 said:
I have a simple question...what is the stance of insurance about proceedures performed by these optometrists? I assume they must have their own insurance. Why aren't their patients suing them for millions and increasing their premiums to astronomical heights? I'd think that this could be a way to deter this unless they somehow have better relationships with optometrists than medical insurance does with ophthalmologists.
To my knowledge there has never been a claim against an OD for a Yag, ALT, or PI. Insurance rates for OD's in OK are not any higher than those for OD's in states that cannot perform anterior seg lasers. I guess the real answer to your question is that it has never been proven that an OD caused real harm to a patient by performing these procedures.
I work in a rural area and the level of competance runs a broad range of completely incompetant (sending me a nine year old with COMPLETELY NORMAL eye exam after scaring the s### out of them by telling them she has retinoblastoma or EYE CANCER!) to very competant (efficiently managing straightforward glaucoma, minimal BDR and prompt referrals to ophthalmology as needed).
This is true within ophthalmology as well. I have seen referrals from OMD's (when I was at Bascom Palmer) that are just as scary as your retinoblastoma example. And don't get me started about all the discount LASIK places butchering patients.
However, many DO NOT TRUST me to send cataract patients back to them lickety split so they can collect post-op care fees which would be free and part of cataract surgery fees paid by insurance if done by myself. It goes to show there is a great divide between optometry and opthalmology that doesn't bode well for any compromise or good working relationships in general.
The post-op care is paid for by insurance when the OD performs it as well (as long as the OD is on the panel). Medicare, for example has an 80/20 split for co-management. The only additional fees collected by the OD during the post-op period is for the refraction which is not covered by Medicare.
 
It's been awhile since this thread has been active. Here's an article from the AAO's website that I found interesting and pertinent.

"A recent survey shows consumers are confused about the differences among eye care providers, but when it comes to surgery, consumers overwhelmingly know that they want a provider with a medical degree..." read the rest of the article here

http://www.aao.org/advocacy/ncl_survey_2005.cfm

Also, check out Dr. Parke's (dept chair of U of Oklahoma) recent article in Ophthalmology Times re: the future of ophthalmology in terms of reimbursement and OD expansion.

http://www.ophthalmologytimes.com/ophthalmologytimes/article/articleDetail.jsp?id=184551&pageID=1
 
aphistis said:
I agree with most of what you said here...but this part is seriously screwed up. Anytime anyone gives you ANY medication, you're getting "controlled doses of a poison."

Yes, but I trust a physician to do it correctly. I don't trust a Nurse anesthetist as much (i.e. anesthesia in the OR)
 
The National Consumer’s League, the nation’s oldest consumer advocacy organization, has released an Eye Care Study that contains a thorough consumer survey and a framework for consumer decision-making. Findings include:

confusion about the qualifications and training of eye care providers
consumer preference for ophthalmologists when it comes to medical and surgical care
consumer preference for state medical boards, not state legislators, to define surgery
The Framework for Consumer Eye Care Decisions gives consumers tips for choosing the appropriate eye care provider:

what services do I need my eye-care provider to perform?
do I know the credentials and qualification of my eye care provider?
does the eye care provider have sufficient training and experience to perform surgery and prescribe medications?
do I have access to the eye care provider I need?
do I know how to report problems to proper regulatory authorities?
A link to the white paper and an executive summary can be found at http://www.nclnet.org/health/eyes/White Paper Final.pdf
 
yikes...this thread has gotten huge since the original post. :eek:
 
1. Optometrists don't want surgery.

2. The reason for the Oklahoma situation.

3. OD's aren't taking over ophthalmology.

4. The best thing is for optometrists and ophthalmologists to work together.

I read this response from this medical student whose girlfriend is in optometry school and the lack of knowledge and pure ignorance is shocking. Please do not insult medical students everywhere by saying that optometry school is harder than med school. I know multiple ophthalmologists who have gone to optometry school before medical school and they say there is no comparison. The scary thing about optometry is that they don't know what they don't know. During training in residency one will come across many patients that have been mishandled by the optom and referred at the end of the disease process to the ophthalmologists. Optoms are best at refraction and that is what they should stick to. This overcompensation for the boredom of refraction by trying to become "doctors" "optometric physicians" has got to stop. They chose that field and if they wanted to do surgery or treat medical diseases they should have gone to medical school and residency. The real test is if your mother had open angle glaucoma, if you really believe what you are saying, have her be followed by an optometrist. Anyway who would recommend that to you is really not your friend.

In life whenever there is something that is good and there is a difficult route to get to it, there will always be people who will try to take a shortcut to get there also.

Ophthalmologist from D.C

P.S Did you go to the last AMA meeting in Dallas? I think I talked to you there.
 
In addition to scope of practice issues, keep in mind that we have other things to fight for:

-Medicare reimbursements (this is something that Optometry and Ophthalmology can work together)

-Malpractice reform

-Research money for the NEI

The recent American Academy of Ophthalmology Mid-Year forum had record turnouts. We also had more than 40 members-in-training participate.

The Podcast can be heard here (MP3) format:
http://www.aao.org/member/myf/podcast.cfm
 
ontario, overnight, just went from the most conservative jurisdictions (in north america?) with regards to optometric rights, to perhaps one of the most broad.

the health professions advisory committee has recommended optometrists be given topicals AND orals. just like that. prior to the recommendation, optoms there were essentially limited to tropicamide, cyclopentolate, and alcaine.
 
14_of_spades said:
ontario, overnight, just went from the most conservative jurisdictions (in north america?) with regards to optometric rights, to perhaps one of the most broad.

While the recomendations would make ontario the most progressive in Canada, for being the first province to allow OD's to Rx orals, in comparision to the rest of North Ameica it is still pretty restrictive given that OD's must continue co-managing glaucoma patients with an Ophtho.
 
according to tlc (the laser center) most optoms are afraid to co-manage lasik b/c there afraid of gettig sued . do you think they really want to do surgery?
 
HOLLYWOOD said:
according to tlc (the laser center) most optoms are afraid to co-manage lasik b/c there afraid of gettig sued . do you think they really want to do surgery?

I am not sure if you are being serious or just being sarcastic. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you are not aware of the situation.

Anyways, yes, optometrists are lobbying hard to set up optometric surgical residencies where they will learn surgical procedures. In OK, they have already been given some surgical rights.
 
HOLLYWOOD said:
according to tlc (the laser center) most optoms are afraid to co-manage lasik b/c there afraid of gettig sued . do you think they really want to do surgery?


I think this can be a good thing. Unfortunately, ALL surgical refractive treatments are subject to wide range of complications. Stands to reason that an OD might not want to risk the obvious liability. This hopefully leads to a more conservative philosophy, regarding these types of tx's. Perhaps, I should start a thread regarding surgical complications, and how common and severe they can truly be.
 
If they have received enough training, they will. I wouldn't trust a non-physician because where his/her backing coming from. Just because he/she is trained doesn't mean the practitioner is certified in it.

yes ! although i have -1.00 eyesight in both eyes, i could use some surgery.:cool:
 
In addition to scope of practice issues, keep in mind that we have other things to fight for:

-Medicare reimbursements (this is something that Optometry and Ophthalmology can work together)

-Malpractice reform

-Research money for the NEI

The recent American Academy of Ophthalmology Mid-Year forum had record turnouts. We also had more than 40 members-in-training participate.

The Podcast can be heard here (MP3) format:
http://www.aao.org/member/myf/podcast.cfm

I am in agreement. I have been following your posts and you really make a lot of excellent points. Keep up the good work and stay politically active. We need more level headed individuals such as yourself on both sides of the fence.
 
Not an Opthalmologist or OD here.... but I do have some comments as a third party MD.

1) WTF is up with Oklahoma.. I mean seriously... let us be real for just 1 minute... Time out. If there is a lack of Ophthalmologists in Oklahoma why isnt the state constructing a serious residency over there? Does anyone even dare to claim that if an Ophthalmology residency opened in OK that no MD/DOs wouldn't go there? They would be flooded! And all the published data shows that where you finish your residency is where you are likely to practice... they want more opthos then they need to open a residency over there... not go give ODs extra privilages with the excuse that no ophthos are around. You don't drop the qualifications, that's just stupid and ignorant...

2) My personal view is that OD should just stop this fight and just work on becoming a residency after medical school. You will start getting hospital privilages and you will get referals from other MD/DOs. Everyone would be happy.. the relationship between Optemitrists and Ophthalmologists would turn into that of Neurologists/Neurosurgeons or that of Cardiologists/Cardiovascular Surgeons. It would fix the problem entirely. The problem is that I bet OD higher ups would never even consider this and Ophthalmologists would are too scared because it might shrink their residencies like cardiovascular surgery shrunk after Cardiology became invasive. My advise to Ophthalmology... There is no avoiding it... make them a residency before they eat up more of your practice.

I realize comment number 2 will make people go wild... but whatever... It's an outside the box thought.:cool:
 
I am in agreement. I have been following your posts and you really make a lot of excellent points. Keep up the good work and stay politically active. We need more level headed individuals such as yourself on both sides of the fence.

Thanks for your post! I am involved with the Congressional Advocacy Committee and the Young Ophthalmologist Committee for the American Academy of Ophthalmology. Although we do discuss scope of practice issues, the main issue right now is the SGR and Medicare reimbursements. No one, not even optometrists, will want to do cataract surgery if reimbursements continue to drop. The liability to compensation ratio will be too high!
 
Top