CA optometry

[JMK2005]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Cali optometrists at it again.
Disgusted.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0451-0500/sb_492_bill_20130401_amended_sen_v98.html

 

[Silent Cool]

Cali optometrists at it again.
Disgusted.

http://www.leginfo.ca.gov/pub/13-14/bill/sen/sb_0451-0500/sb_492_bill_20130401_amended_sen_v98.html

Gateway to surgery in CA perhaps?

 

[Eyefixer]

How do you feel about that Silent? Can you tell us more ?

 

[Silent Cool]

How do you feel about that Silent? Can you tell us more ?

😕

 

[RestoreSight]

After reading it I'm not sure if the scope of practice was expanded at all. There is a line stating they can perform any procedure, medical or surgical, requiring topical or local anesthesia. Is that where the concern is?

 

[ophthope]

After reading it I'm not sure if the scope of practice was expanded at all. There is a line stating they can perform any procedure, medical or surgical, requiring topical or local anesthesia. Is that where the concern is?

That, and where they strike out the statement that says "The practice of optometry does not include performing surgery."

So, yeah I think it would seem the scope of practice is expanded.

 

[RestoreSight]

That, and where they strike out the statement that says "The practice of optometry does not include performing surgery."

So, yeah I think it would seem the scope of practice is expanded.

This doesn't seem like the end of it to me. Has this law passed both the CA house and senate? Has it been signed by the governor yet? There are hundreds of bills like this that end up going nowhere.

 

[Silent Cool]

That, and where they strike out the statement that says "The practice of optometry does not include performing surgery."

So, yeah I think it would seem the scope of practice is expanded.

Sounds like the dust bowl of Oklahoma might move west. I heard recently that a bill(?) was proposed in CA that would grant a massive expansion of practice abilities to a variety of non-physicians. Do you think that OD's could be allowed to perform scalpel surgery in CA as they do in OK?

 

[KHE]

I performed two surgeries in my office on Friday.

On the first patient, I put in two punctual plugs. But just to put on a good show, before I did it, I went into the exam room next door and changed into green scrubs and put on a surgical mask.

For the second one later that day, a man walked in with a metallic foreign body. I had already changed out of my scrubs and they were crumpled up at the bottom of the hamper so in THAT case, to put on a good show, I made a big production out of washing my hands and when I came back into the room, I made sure to bump in backwards like a real surgeon.

 

[odieoh]

I performed two surgeries in my office on Friday.

On the first patient, I put in two punctual plugs. But just to put on a good show, before I did it, I went into the exam room next door and changed into green scrubs and put on a surgical mask.

For the second one later that day, a man walked in with a metallic foreign body. I had already changed out of my scrubs and they were crumpled up at the bottom of the hamper so in THAT case, to put on a good show, I made a big production out of washing my hands and when I came back into the room, I made sure to bump in backwards like a real surgeon.

You power-crazed bastard!! Did you yell "Stat!" when asking for forceps/needle/whatever you use for FB removal? You really gotta sell it like that, you know, for credibility and such.

 

[ophthope]

I performed two surgeries in my office on Friday.

On the first patient, I put in two punctual plugs. But just to put on a good show, before I did it, I went into the exam room next door and changed into green scrubs and put on a surgical mask.

For the second one later that day, a man walked in with a metallic foreign body. I had already changed out of my scrubs and they were crumpled up at the bottom of the hamper so in THAT case, to put on a good show, I made a big production out of washing my hands and when I came back into the room, I made sure to bump in backwards like a real surgeon.

If you're being snide about my comment: the original text that is struck-through included all of these procedures and did not consider them to be "surgery." It is definitely a proposal for scope increase. If you honestly think that this isn't an attempt at stepping toward a scope of practice increase to include scalpel surgery, please comment.

Did you even read the bill?

 

[KHE]

Truth be told, no I did not read it.

But here's the thing....after 13 years in this business, I've learned than when either side presents a bill, it's always an absurd expansion of scope or an absurd restriction and you hope for something in the middle.

For example, I live in Connecticut and the state medical society just attempted to pass a bill that would restrict any surgical procedure code to MDs or DOs only. That would have essentially meant that I would not have been able to do either of the two "procedures" I did a couple of days ago even though I've safely and efficiently done hundreds of each.

It's just the nature of politics, unfortunately.

Secondly, knowing the state of optometry and medicine in California, there is just about as much chance of that law passing as there is of my beloved Buffalo Bills winning the superbowl next year.

So as always, these things always turn into much ado about nothing.