Did anyone buy the pan-optic ophthalmoscope?

[Jalopycat]

I need to buy an ophthalmoscope and really like the new pan-optic ones, but I'm wondering if they're really worth the extra money. Did anyone else buy one, and if so, are you glad you did or do you wish you had saved your money?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[DrMom]

I got one, as did the vast majority of my classmates.

Pros: it is much easier to use and has a much larger field of view. also, you don't have to have your face right by your patient's face (for what that's worth)
Cons: you will still have to learn how to use a traditional ophthalmoscope as that is what is in many clinics & offices and it does cost more

I'm glad I got mine.

 

[Castro Viejo]

Forget the pan-optic. I wish I had saved money instead of buying the (required) ophthalmoscope for second-year! Now it's just a really expensive flashlight.

 

[The Pill Counter]

I like it. Much easier to use than a direct opthalmoscope, but size of case is pretty impractical to carry around.

 

[TulaneKid24]

Don't buy it. I bought one and have used it 3 times. It was always a pain to carry around. And when I did put it in my bag, I was always nervous it would dissappear. My advice is: Learn how to use the direct ophthalmoscopes that are provided FREE on the walls of the hospitals and clinics.

You will save yourself a lot of money.

 

[doc05]

I concur. The panoptic is a tremendous waste of money. It's a nice toy, but you don't need it. If your school requires that you buy a scope, get a used one -- these things never really break down, except perhaps when they need a new battery. That is certainly more reasonable than the price of a new one (direct or panoptic). Plus you need to learn how to use a direct ophthalmoscope, because that's what you actually use in real life.

 

[BamaFlip]

Don't buy the PanOptic!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When was the last time you entered into an exam room and saw one hanging on the wall? Never is the right answer. Save a couple of hundred dollars and buy a cheap one (you'll only use it a couple of times anyways and will only need the chep one to practice with).

 

[KyGrlDr2B]

About half of my class bought pan-optics. Everyone is pretty happy with them. We had to use them to practice with for our physical exam test and of course during the test. It was nice during the test to not have to fumble with the regular one because you are nervous enough already. We also have to use them 2nd year for more practicing and more tests. So just as long as you get one you feel comfortable with, it is fine. Also, the third years I know that have them, just carry them around in their pockets. Those pockets are huge and have plenty of room. And the reason you don't see them hanging up in exam rooms is because they are too new. You never know what will happen in the future.

 

[BamaFlip]

I know the reason they are not hanging in exam rooms is because they are new. When was the last time you saw a hospital comletely overhall every exam room with new equipment? If a hospital is gonna spend money nowadays on luxury items, I would probably bet they would rather save up and spend it on high-tech state-of-the-art crap like PET scanners or Gamma Knifes to look cool for review boards.

The fact of the matter is that the PanOptic is a luxury item which you can easily do without as a medical student. If you are looking to go blow money on a gadget, buy a PDA or a digital camera. It is not worth the extra money to have an ophtalmoscope that looks like a laser gun. I even know opthalmologists that don't even care to use the PanOptic, recent resident grads included. The fact is that you can see just as much with the old-school version as you can with the new; you simply have a little more of a learning curve with the old one. I agree, it does look cool and all, but I just don't think it is worth the extra dough.

 

[Richard_Hom]

Dear Jaopycat,

1. It's a superflous instrument that should be purchased for the purpose of "screening"

2. It's much more important to get functional with the direct ophthalmoscope because it can be used as a penlight for pupillary function, check for media opacities (if you stand back a bit and click in the lenses), and look at the Posterior Pole. Most pathology still is in the 3-5 mm around the macula or the disc.

3. Most eyecare providers need to see the fine details of the macula and the optic nerve head. In my opinion, I would recommend primary care providers concentrating on these two areas as it yields the most pathology.

Originally posted by Jalopycat
I need to buy an ophthalmoscope and really like the new pan-optic ones, but I'm wondering if they're really worth the extra money.

Regards,
Richard

 

[Caffeinated]

Get the traditional ophthalmoscope, and get good at that. I recommend practicing on a dilated pupil at first, if possible. This helps you see the detail and is more forgiving. Once you master the dilated pupil, then the undilated pupil is just a little more challenging. If you try to learn on the undilated pupil from the start, it could be a losing battle.

When the PanOptic first hit the market, I saw it at an exhibit and was impressed. We bought them for our office, and subsequently discovered how worthless they really are. Here are some of the drawbacks:

1. Although the field of view is larger, the image is a lot dimmer. Thus, you need the black rubber eye cup to block out all ambient light.

2. The black rubber eye cup falls off very easily.

3. The black rubber eye cup touches the patient's skin, so there is an infection control issue to consider.

4. The shape and design of the scope makes it very easy for the newbie to look down the wrong end of the scope. I can't tell you how many times I have done this.

All things considered, everyone tends to prefer what they learned on. I learned on a traditional, so that is my scope of choice. I know folks who swear by the PanOptic.

In my humble opinion, if I had to spend extra dough on an ophthalmoscope, I would buy a Keeler traditional ophthalmoscope over a Welch Allyn PanOptic. The optics in the Keeler will knock your socks off, if you are willing to spend the money.

 

[mongoose]

i got the traditional Heine ophthalmoscope...fine german engineering. it's kinda like the BMW of traditional ophtho's...i like the pan-optic and all but i am glad i got the one i did. you wouldn't believe how many docs wanna check it out at the hospital cause it ain't the usual welch-allyn stuff. anything that makes you stand out to your superiors is a good thing.

 

[doctor7]

The pan-optic kicks butt. I yanked my baby out while doing some exams at my school's opthamology institute & the residency director came over to say "these things are great, i make all the opthamology residents get them."

Then, the opthamology residents came over and said "hey, these things are great...but all that hand-held bull**** is useless anyways. you've gotta dilate the pupils and use the slit lamp microscope to get a decent look."

Essentially, I figure if I'm gonna blow a couple of hundred dollars on something useless...I might as well blow a few more hundred on something that I can be proud of. It's by far superior to all the old school stuff from the aspect of form and functionality.

I got the whole package from one of the online companies for $500 ( the top-of-the-line panoptic with smart batter ).

 

[Doc AdamK in 2006]

It really not worth getting.

But I think Welch Allyn is offering a trade in deal for the pan optic scope.

AK