American Board of Optometric Practice

[anxietypeaker]

what ever happened to the American Board of Optometric Practice. It was formed in 2000 to allow ODs to become board certified in a specialty/subspecialty. I cant find it online, anyone have any info?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Ben Chudner]

what ever happened to the American Board of Optometric Practice. It was formed in 2000 to allow ODs to become board certified in a specialty/subspecialty. I cant find it online, anyone have any info?

The ABOP no longer exists. It was a failed attempt to allow OD's to become board certified similar to OMD's. It was a classic example of the AOA not understanding its members.

 

[SoxTown]

The ABOP no longer exists. It was a failed attempt to allow OD's to become board certified similar to OMD's. It was a classic example of the AOA not understanding its members.

Could you expand on what you mean by "a classic example of the AOA not understanding its members."?

 

[anxietypeaker]

i would be more willing to pursue OD if it were more structured with formal boards/specialties. I realize money would be less during resid, bla bla...but if i wanted money i woulda done business.

 

[xmattODx]

i would be more willing to pursue OD if it were more structured with formal boards/specialties. I realize money would be less during resid, bla bla...but if i wanted money i woulda done business.

How much more specialized do you want? We do primary eye care. If you want to specialize go to med school.

 

[anxietypeaker]

well why not a board certification in bioptics or whatever, etc etc...they classified the residencies into specialties. I dont know...i dont mind losing money and several of people i know are going into dent/pod/pharm because they feel that theyre more formal in their edu...whether thats true or not is not what im thinking, why not add the board option? id definitely consider OD more if that were the case. Any rebuts? please be polite...i dont want a fight.

 

[Hines302]

I definitely think that there should be some sort of certification for specialties in optometry! However the issue is whether or not there will be a need for this in the future. I do not see OD's ever specializing is just one thing. For example.... will a pediatric OD only ever see pediatric patients?? Conversely, would an OD who is not certified in pediatrics not be able to see these types of patients. Probably not. Simply because there is just not a demand for this, and further more it is not convenient for the patient. The only way I can see this working is in a group practice, where there would be specialist in the same office... or maybe for something more obscure... like vision therapy. But again, is there a demand for this? I don’t think so. Optometrist are primary care providers and need to be able to handle all aspects of primary care.

Again, I would love to see specialties develop in the profession, however i do not think it is practical.

I think what the profession needs to focus its attention on at the moment is not establishing certifications or expanding scope (although these are important) but on UNIFORM laws across all states. Also, all OD's should also be practicing the same scope of optometry, or at least held to certain standards. For example, it is my understanding that their are some OD's out there who are not even certified to dialate! Are you kidding me! I hope this is not true.

Any other thoughts?? I am just a pre-opt student andwould love to hear some other opinions!

 

[anxietypeaker]

well...id rather not get into what the aoa should focus on. Lets just focus on whether specialties is a good idea or not first.

As far as not having demand for specialties, i dont think thats too applicable. It will always be useful to have a certain specialty, if just general optometry. Pharmacy has several specialties, and one of them is pharmacotherapy which is general pharmacy (or the closest one to it). The pharm schools didnt do this cuz there was huge demand (in fact, i think theres less of a demand for this than optom specialties). They did this to enhance the edu of pharmDs.

As far as the remark about ped optomerists only seeing kids, i dont think thats a prob either. If we look to pharm again, they have "added qualifications" rather than subspecialties (MD/DO have this as well as subspecialties). The added qualifications just means what it says. You cant do both your speciality (lets say thats a 2 yr gen opt) as well as your added qualif (say pediatrics 1 yr).

Any other thoughts/rebuts? Im particularly interested in rebuts since id like to hear the other side.

 

[Opii]

After graduating from optometry school you can always consider a fellowship too instead of a residency. I believe the American Academy Optometry has several specialties to focus on. Peds, Pathology, CL, etc... You are required to do several projects, publish a few things you researched or an interesting case. Their list of requirements are in their website. That is what it means when you see an OD with an FAAO after it. They specialized in something. Then you have FCOVD. That's Binocular vision and peds.

 

[Ben Chudner]

After graduating from optometry school you can always consider a fellowship too instead of a residency. I believe the American Academy Optometry has several specialties to focus on. Peds, Pathology, CL, etc... You are required to do several projects, publish a few things you researched or an interesting case. Their list of requirements are in their website. That is what it means when you see an OD with an FAAO after it. They specialized in something. Then you have FCOVD. That's Binocular vision and peds.

There is no "real" fellowship in optometry. Being an FAAO (Fellow of the American Academy of Optometry) is not the same as a fellowship trained doctor. To become an FAAO you need 50 points and then an interview with the fellowship committee. You get 10 points for each case report submitted, poster presented at Academy, and I think for giving a lecture (not sure about this one). You can get 20 points for completing a residency. Once you have your 50 points, you get to be interviewed where you are asked about your case reports or posters. After that, you are a fellow. I have never heard of anyone that was interviewed that did not become a fellow. This is far different from completing a fellowship in retina, for example where you continue your education for another 2 years after your 3 year residency. There are optometric programs that call themselves fellowships. I know of a glaucoma one. This is an insult to glaucoma fellows (OMD's) as this is not much different than any other OD residency, and does not allow you to manage patients any differently than someone who doesn't do anything after graduation.

You can also go on and become a diplomate in a specialty through the Academy. This too, is merely submitting cases (10, I believe) and defending those cases in front of a committee. You also have to perform a exam on a live patient in front of a committee. For low vision, for example, you have to perform a low vision exam. This is much more difficult than becomming a fellow and far less people do this. Most people that do this do it for academia.

Ben Chudner, OD, FAAO

 

[Ben Chudner]

Could you expand on what you mean by "a classic example of the AOA not understanding its members."?

The AOA passed the ABOP without really notifying its members this was going to happen. The board members felt this was vitally important because insurance companies had a question regarding board certification on their applications. It was thought that since OD's cannot check this box, insurance companies could deny them access to the panel. Whether or not this was true, when the members found out they would have to become certified and take additional continuing education every year to maintain certification they were not happy. State organizations were flooded with complaints, and eventually the AOA had to agree to hold another vote. It failed miserably. I was involved in the discussions in Washington State when the AOA came to talk to us. These were some of the most heated discussions we have had in a long time. In the end it became obvious that the AOA is out of touch with what its members feel is important to them. Issues such as a uniform scope of practice, reciprocity between states, etc.

 

[Opii]

There is no "real" fellowship in optometry. Being an FAAO (Fellow of the American Academy of Optometry) is not the same as a fellowship trained doctor. To become an FAAO you need 50 points and then an interview with the fellowship committee. You get 10 points for each case report submitted, poster presented at Academy, and I think for giving a lecture (not sure about this one). You can get 20 points for completing a residency. Once you have your 50 points, you get to be interviewed where you are asked about your case reports or posters. After that, you are a fellow. I have never heard of anyone that was interviewed that did not become a fellow. This is far different from completing a fellowship in retina, for example where you continue your education for another 2 years after your 3 year residency. There are optometric programs that call themselves fellowships. I know of a glaucoma one. This is an insult to glaucoma fellows (OMD's) as this is not much different than any other OD residency, and does not allow you to manage patients any differently than someone who doesn't do anything after graduation.

You can also go on and become a diplomate in a specialty through the Academy. This too, is merely submitting cases (10, I believe) and defending those cases in front of a committee. You also have to perform a exam on a live patient in front of a committee. For low vision, for example, you have to perform a low vision exam. This is much more difficult than becomming a fellow and far less people do this. Most people that do this do it for academia.

Ben Chudner, OD, FAAO

Thanks for defining the steps more clearly.
Which was your area of interest?

 

[Ben Chudner]

Thanks for defining the steps more clearly.
Which was your area of interest?

There are currently no areas of interest for fellows, only diplomates.