Can an Ophthalmologist work as an optometrist?

[SeeTheSun]

Every since my parents found out i had an interest in optometry they have asked their optometrists questions whenever they go. my mom went to other day, and she asked her optometrist what school he attended, he said "i went to ucla, then usc". she asked again because she thought that i had told her usc didnt have an optometry school and he said the same thing. so my question is can an ophthalmologist work as an optometrist? that is my only guess because i know usc has an ophthalmology department.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[KHE]

Every since my parents found out i had an interest in optometry they have asked their optometrists questions whenever they go. my mom went to other day, and she asked her optometrist what school he attended, he said "i went to ucla, then usc". she asked again because she thought that i had told her usc didnt have an optometry school and he said the same thing. so my question is can an ophthalmologist work as an optometrist? that is my only guess because i know usc has an ophthalmology department.

There is nothing that an optometrist is licensed to do that an ophthalmologist is not.

Either your parents' optometrist is engaging in some sort of puffery, because neither UCLA or USC have optometry programs, or your parents are unknowingly seeing an ophthalmologist.

 

[PBEA]

Every since my parents found out i had an interest in optometry they have asked their optometrists questions whenever they go. my mom went to other day, and she asked her optometrist what school he attended, he said "i went to ucla, then usc". she asked again because she thought that i had told her usc didnt have an optometry school and he said the same thing. so my question is can an ophthalmologist work as an optometrist? that is my only guess because i know usc has an ophthalmology department.

or maybe they miss heard "uc", which does have an optometry school

 

[optsuker]

There is nothing that an optometrist is licensed to do that an ophthalmologist is not.

Either your parents' optometrist is engaging in some sort of puffery, because neither UCLA or USC have optometry programs, or your parents are unknowingly seeing an ophthalmologist.

My guess is he said Southern California College of Optometry and they only heard "Southern Cal."

 

[Meibomian SxN]

Every since my parents found out i had an interest in optometry they have asked their optometrists questions whenever they go. my mom went to other day, and she asked her optometrist what school he attended, he said "i went to ucla, then usc". she asked again because she thought that i had told her usc didnt have an optometry school and he said the same thing. so my question is can an ophthalmologist work as an optometrist? that is my only guess because i know usc has an ophthalmology department.

Years ago when I first graduated I interviewed at a group oMD practice that was looking to replace their retiring optometrist. So I shadowed one oMD for part of the day and he told me he fits contacts and all the surgeries (even cataracts) go to the senior docs...

So to answer your question, yes oMDs can work as optometrists. But this is atypical.

 

[sbriley]

Is there anything an optometrist can do that an ophthalmologist CAN'T?

 

[IndianaOD]

Is there anything an optometrist can do that an ophthalmologist CAN'T?

Not legally but ODs are typically more involved in some areas like binocular vision, specialty contact lenses, visual rehab etc.

 

[physicslover]

Well I would think optometrists would have a more integrated approach to the eye, since they start learning about the eye directly for 4 years. The ophthalmologist, instead goes to medical school first, and is then introduced to the eye. So the 2 have a very different approach. Are ophthalmologists trained to refract/fit contacts?

 

[C5toC9]

Ophthalmologists can do things that optometrists cannot, but not vice-versa.

 

[Mewcakes]

I thought someone once told me that SCCO used to be part of USC, then they split to form their own school. I think it was an alumni that told me, actually. If the dr was kinda old, then it makes even more sense.

 

[itek2OD]

..... Are ophthalmologists trained to refract/fit contacts?....

I have teched in two hospitals with ophthalmology resident programs - all residents were trained in both refraction and fitting contacts. In fact, one of our OD's helped introduce first years to clinic this July by refracting yours truly. All residents spend at least four weeks in a CL rotation with a cornea specialist, OD's and contact lens techs. I'm pretty sure residents get tested on both CLs and refraction for boards.

Now, how often an ophthalmologist needs to refract, and/or fit CL's depends on their specialty and if they have techs to do it.

But ultimately, as listed before....... ophthalmologists (EyeMD's) can do anything an optometrist can do.

 

[GOWINGS]

Is there anything an optometrist can do that an ophthalmologist CAN'T?

In terms of what the law says and technical terms, there is nothing that an optometrist can do that an ophthalmologist can't. However, in reality, optometrists can do many things that ophthalmologists won't touch because they don't know how and it would be unethical for them to attempt these things that they're not really trained at. Optometrists are good at stereoacuity, depth perception and binocular vision, low vision, sports vision, contact lens fittings of odd shaped corneas etc., diagnosis, treatment of eye diseases and they are the BEST at what they do. Ophthalmologists are good at LASIK, surgical procedures, treatment of diseases that require surgery, diagnosing common/rare diseases in their area of specialty (whether that be the retina, optic nerve, etc.) and they are the BEST at what they do. Believe it or not, it is usually best to see an optometrist first, because ophthalmologists are usually the best diagnosing their specific area of specialization whereas optometrists are better at a general diagnosis. People go to an ophthalmologist first and end up being referred from one ophthalmologist to the other because each one is very proficient at their area of specialty of the eye and don't really deal with other areas on a daily basis. An optometrist usually has a more general understanding of the eye and can usually tell you what you have right away (since they do general eye exams as their profession). Sometimes they might not necessarily be able to tell you what you have exactly, but will know where the problem in your eyes lie and can refer you to the right ophthalmologist that will be able to diagnose your disease. So in summary, regardless what the law says, an ophthalmologist (generally) can't be a good optometrist without receiving a lot of experience and training from an optometrist. Not to mention that optometrists do residencies in areas that ophthalmologists are completely clueless about (i.e. contact lenses, low vision, etc.). But like I said, optometrists are good at what they do and they are the best at what they do. Ophthalmologists are good at what they do and they are the best at what they do.

 

[Commando303]

In terms of what the law says and technical terms, there is nothing that an optometrist can do that an ophthalmologist can't. However, in reality, optometrists can do many things that ophthalmologists won't touch because they don't know how and it would be unethical for them to attempt these things that they're not really trained at. Optometrists are good at stereoacuity, depth perception and binocular vision, low vision, sports vision, contact lens fittings of odd shaped corneas etc., diagnosis, treatment of eye diseases and they are the BEST at what they do. Ophthalmologists are good at LASIK, surgical procedures, treatment of diseases that require surgery, diagnosing common/rare diseases in their area of specialty (whether that be the retina, optic nerve, etc.) and they are the BEST at what they do. Believe it or not, it is usually best to see an optometrist first, because ophthalmologists are usually the best diagnosing their specific area of specialization whereas optometrists are better at a general diagnosis. People go to an ophthalmologist first and end up being referred from one ophthalmologist to the other because each one is very proficient at their area of specialty of the eye and don't really deal with other areas on a daily basis. An optometrist usually has a more general understanding of the eye and can usually tell you what you have right away (since they do general eye exams as their profession). Sometimes they might not necessarily be able to tell you what you have exactly, but will know where the problem in your eyes lie and can refer you to the right ophthalmologist that will be able to diagnose your disease. So in summary, regardless what the law says, an ophthalmologist (generally) can't be a good optometrist without receiving a lot of experience and training from an optometrist. Not to mention that optometrists do residencies in areas that ophthalmologists are completely clueless about (i.e. contact lenses, low vision, etc.). But like I said, optometrists are good at what they do and they are the best at what they do. Ophthalmologists are good at what they do and they are the best at what they do.

That's very untrue. You're referring to ophthalmology sub-specialty, such as glaucoma and retina. The job of general ophthalmology is primary eye-care, and no one with a shred of sense would consider the field second to optometry with regard to diagnosing ocular pathology.

Areas in which optometry arguably has relative prominence — i.e., not those that ophthalmology is forbidden to work in, but those in which, historically, it has not — are contact lens, low vision, and binocular vision (side-stepping the orthoptics issue).