Legalized Sight Testing, Online Order of CLs, Mandatory PD with Rx, etc. in BC

[stonegoat]

That's true. Although that could change.

Are children covered for eye exams by the provincial insurance?

Yes, there is coverage up to 19.

There is a certian % of the population that does not see the value of an eye exam...and no amount of information will change their view. Most people, however, place significant value on their eye health, so they will seek-out eye exams, once they know the benefit.

I do, however, predict an exponential increase in internet dispensing. Labs in third-world countries can make decent glasses for next to nothing. Optometry cannot escape globalization. I still think optometry is an will continue to be a wonderful profession - I just think (I may be wrong), that in 10-20 years, most ODs will be non-dispensing.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Optogal]

There is a certian % of the population that does not see the value of an eye exam...and no amount of information will change their view.

My position is simply, ALLOWING for sight-testing i.e. putting in the legal infrastructure for this activity, may possibly encourage more folks to be satisfied with a sight-test, than would otherwise occur if sight-testing were illegal.

This is an opinion - and as such, unless you can claim with certainty that my opinion is false, then I don't think you can claim that sight-testing will (in the future) have no "effect" on optometry. Perhaps not a large one, but in Vancouver where there may be an over-saturation of ODs, I think it has the potential to affect some folks in terms of how many eye exams they do.

 

[Optogal]

I do, however, predict an exponential increase in internet dispensing. Labs in third-world countries can make decent glasses for next to nothing. Optometry cannot escape globalization. I still think optometry is an will continue to be a wonderful profession - I just think (I may be wrong), that in 10-20 years, most ODs will be non-dispensing.

I will also state that your prediction here is likely based on the cost savings to the consumer i.e. it's much cheaper for them to buy their glasses online than from an optometrist or optical.

If that's the case, isn't it sensible that some folks will pursue additional cost savings if they have the legal choice to get their refraction from an optician, because the optician is cheaper than the optometrist?

You mentioned earlier the folks who buy their glasses online aren't the patients you want anyways - but those are the patients (everyone) you say will eventually buy online. If cost is the driving factor that eliminates brick-and-mortar opticals, then it may also be the factor that propels sight-testing for some.

 

[IndianaOD]

This is great news for Canadians! If we want the health of our eyes checked then go to a doctor, pay extra for picture of your retina and Goldmann visual field testing etc. If not, just buy glasses and contacts online, particularly those of us whose prescriptions are stable. If OD's want to be seen as doctors then I think they should be primarily concerned with eye health, NOT being the person who sells me eyeglasses.

Business for ODs will not change much considering people with private health insurance plans will still go for the whole exam, don't you agree?

Before you remind me, yes I am a med student and yes I know about the threat of NPs. This issue also affects you as optometry students. How long before NPs are completing extra training and becoming qualified to perform eye exams?

Know what else would be cheaper? Not needing an Rx for birth control. That Rx is the only think keeping a large chunk of women coming in for yearly pap smears etc.

The automatic blood pressure cuff at the pharmacy is free. Why not go grab some Norvasc or hydrochlorothiazide off the shelf? It might make you pee more but no biggie. Save you at least 2-3 exams the first year and yearly there after. Hundreds of dollars. Sound good?

 

[serenmoon]

Know what else would be cheaper? Not needing an Rx for birth control. That Rx is the only think keeping a large chunk of women coming in for yearly pap smears etc.

The automatic blood pressure cuff at the pharmacy is free. Why not go grab some Norvasc or hydrochlorothiazide off the shelf? It might make you pee more but no biggie. Save you at least 2-3 exams the first year and yearly there after. Hundreds of dollars. Sound good?

'Yearly' pap smears tied to birth control? Girls start the pill at like age 14 but pap smears do not commence until AT LEAST age 21. And generally paps are only done every three years so the two things are almost completely unrelated.

What was the actual point of your post????? That you want the government to make work for you?

 

[IndianaOD]

Yes, I don't know any OB that will Rx BC without a yearly exam. My wife has had at least 3 different OBs over the years we have been married. She is completely healthy and is required a pap every year for the birth control. I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. I thought the point of my post was obvious but maybe its tough for you to catch on.

 

[IndianaOD]

'Yearly' pap smears tied to birth control? Girls start the pill at like age 14 but pap smears do not commence until AT LEAST age 21. And generally paps are only done every three years so the two things are almost completely unrelated.

What was the actual point of your post????? That you want the government to make work for you?

So you're good with OTC birth control and anti-hypertensives because it would be much cheaper for the public to avoid all the visits to the MD?

 

[serenmoon]

His point is that its reckless to just let anyone diagnose and prescribe for their own conditions.

Well if that was the point then I agree, however I don't think that is what the BC legislation would allow people to do. As I understand it, the optician would give patients their prescription, patients wouldn't be diagnosing anything themselves. If there was a drastic change in the prescription the optician would be required to refer to the OD.

AFAIK, online vendors have not required Canadians to send in prescriptions for quite some time so no big change there.

Optometrists are not necessarily forthcoming in providing patients a copy of their prescription, so this legislation just makes them equivalent to other doctors that give you the prescription and you have the choice to go where you wish to fill it.

 

[serenmoon]

Yes, I don't know any OB that will Rx BC without a yearly exam. My wife has had at least 3 different OBs over the years we have been married. She is completely healthy and is required a pap every year for the birth control. I'm not sure you know what you are talking about. I thought the point of my post was obvious but maybe its tough for you to catch on.

No point arguing about pap recommendations, you are a health professional I am sure you can evaluate the evidence on that for yourself.

 

[serenmoon]

So you're good with OTC birth control and anti-hypertensives because it would be much cheaper for the public to avoid all the visits to the MD?

That's not what this thread is about. Once an MD does the appropriate exam, diagnoses the patient and provides the prescription, the patient has the choice to go wherever they like to have it filled, they can even order their meds online if they choose. This is what the BC legislation would make possible for patients. Optometrists should not be trying to dictate to patients where they get their prescriptions filled.

As for opticians doing sight testing, that's hardly equivalent to getting glasses or contacts 'OTC'. Opticians are a regulated health profession in Canada. They will refer to the OD if there is an unusual change in the prescription etc. What's the problem?

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

'Yearly' pap smears tied to birth control? Girls start the pill at like age 14 but pap smears do not commence until AT LEAST age 21. And generally paps are only done every three years so the two things are almost completely unrelated.

What was the actual point of your post????? That you want the government to make work for you?

Until very recently, they were recommended yearly and often at an earlier age (the rule was 21 or 3 years after sex whichever came first, but many people started at 18 anyway). This yearly practice continued until total hysterectomy or about age 65-70. So yes, OCPs were tied to yearly paps and I suspect still are in many practices. I'd wager that even with the new recommendation, physicians will still want to see these patients yearly just to kinda check in and see if anything is going on (and remind about the potential side effects).

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

That's not what this thread is about. Once an MD does the appropriate exam, diagnoses the patient and provides the prescription, the patient has the choice to go wherever they like to have it filled, they can even order their meds online if they choose. This is what the BC legislation would make possible for patients. Optometrists should not be trying to dictate to patients where they get their prescriptions filled.

As for opticians doing sight testing, that's hardly equivalent to getting glasses or contacts 'OTC'. Opticians are a regulated health profession in Canada. They will refer to the OD if there is an unusual change in the prescription etc. What's the problem?

Yeah, this actually works against the point you're making. A better analogy would be something like a patient comes to you, the nurse finds a high blood pressure and starts the patient on HCTZ without ever seeing you. Ideally you want to find the cause of the problem (or with HTN rule out fixable causes) before you prescribe. The ODs/MDs do this by giving the patient a full exam before handing out prescriptions. Opticians don't.

 

[PBEA]

That's not what this thread is about. Once an MD does the appropriate exam, diagnoses the patient and provides the prescription, the patient has the choice to go wherever they like to have it filled, they can even order their meds online if they choose. This is what the BC legislation would make possible for patients. Optometrists should not be trying to dictate to patients where they get their prescriptions filled.

As for opticians doing sight testing, that's hardly equivalent to getting glasses or contacts 'OTC'. Opticians are a regulated health profession in Canada. They will refer to the OD if there is an unusual change in the prescription etc. What's the problem?

Opticians are high school graduates with no formal training whatsoever. Sure some go and get some eyeglass adjusting course and learn some basic eyeglass measurements but that has nothing to do with having an eye exam. What you are suggesting is that stand alone refractive testing is OK. Remove all the important elements of the exam, leaving only refraction. You may want to boil it down to "greedy ODs" not letting people order glasses elsewhere (which is complete bullshiit btw) but you should realize that medicine/ophthalmology also is against stand alone refraction. Why? because it is misleading and hurts the unsuspecting public.

 

[Haystack]

They will refer to the OD if there is an unusual change in the prescription etc. What's the problem?

The problem is, how the hell are they supposed to know what constitutes an unusual change? What does "etc." mean? Maybe they can detect some other eye disease with their advanced training? Besides, no sight testers that I have encountered ever refer because a prescription change falls outside of guidelines - don't be silly.

 

[Meibomian SxN]

The problem is, how the hell are they supposed to know what constitutes an unusual change? What does "etc." mean? Maybe they can detect some other eye disease with their advanced training? Besides, no sight testers that I have encountered ever refer because a prescription change falls outside of guidelines - don't be silly.

What would you expect coming out of the mouth of a med student who knows only the classroom life...

 

[serenmoon]

Yeah, this actually works against the point you're making. A better analogy would be something like a patient comes to you, the nurse finds a high blood pressure and starts the patient on HCTZ without ever seeing you. Ideally you want to find the cause of the problem (or with HTN rule out fixable causes) before you prescribe. The ODs/MDs do this by giving the patient a full exam before handing out prescriptions. Opticians don't.

I disagree with you entirely on this. My point was that opticians doing sight testing is not the same as patients buying anything OTC. Fail to see how that works against the point I'm making.

Your analogy goes better with IndianaODs point.

 

[serenmoon]

Opticians are high school graduates with no formal training whatsoever. Sure some go and get some eyeglass adjusting course and learn some basic eyeglass measurements but that has nothing to do with having an eye exam. What you are suggesting is that stand alone refractive testing is OK. Remove all the important elements of the exam, leaving only refraction. You may want to boil it down to "greedy ODs" not letting people order glasses elsewhere (which is complete bullshiit btw) but you should realize that medicine/ophthalmology also is against stand alone refraction. Why? because it is misleading and hurts the unsuspecting public.

The thread is about laws in BC. Opticians are a regulated health profession there to my knowledge with training and licensing requirements. Whether 'medicine' or 'ophtho' is against stand alone refraction is not my concern and does not affect my opinion on the subject.

 

[serenmoon]

What would you expect coming out of the mouth of a med student who knows only the classroom life...

LOL...nice try but aren't you the "attending" who plans to do LASIK out of your office after your MD and one year internship?

Glad to see you have developed some common sense since you have left the classroom...maybe not...

 

[serenmoon]

The problem is, how the hell are they supposed to know what constitutes an unusual change? What does "etc." mean? Maybe they can detect some other eye disease with their advanced training? Besides, no sight testers that I have encountered ever refer because a prescription change falls outside of guidelines - don't be silly.

Calm down, friend. I imagine if the patient reports things like new headache, floaters, eye pain, blurriness, double vision (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list ) the optician will refer them to an optometrist. Opticians are not trying to be "doctors" or "detect eye disease" so I don't think you need to be so defensive and paranoid about what i meant by "etc." lol.

None of us have any "trade secrets" anymore. Information is widely available and if you think opticians don't know what would constitute a worrisome change, they can easily incorporate that into their curriculum for the purposes of referring it on to an optometrist or medical doctor if necessary.

 

[IndianaOD]

Calm down, friend. I imagine if the patient reports things like new headache, floaters, eye pain, blurriness, double vision (this is not meant to be an exhaustive list ) the optician will refer them to an optometrist. Opticians are not trying to be "doctors" or "detect eye disease" so I don't think you need to be so defensive and paranoid about what i meant by "etc." lol.

None of us have any "trade secrets" anymore. Information is widely available and if you think opticians don't know what would constitute a worrisome change, they can easily incorporate that into their curriculum for the purposes of referring it on to an optometrist or medical doctor if necessary.

My friend you would have KILLED two patients of mine of the last year. One choroidal melanoma in a 20/20 asymptomatic patient and another patient with retinal findings that was totally asymptomatic and 20/20 who I ordered blood work for and had in the ER that night. Family doc said I may have saved her live. Hemoglobin was at 5.4, though you might not know what that means.

As far as the law. Patients can order glasses or CLs without ever seeing ANYONE. Those "opticians" in BC get part time classes over 6 months. Though you don't even need that to get someone an Rx from what I understand. Yeah, your regular high school grad really knows what is important concerning you eyes and health!

 

[serenmoon]

My friend you would have KILLED two patients of mine of the last year. One choroidal melanoma in a 20/20 asymptomatic patient and another patient with retinal findings that was totally asymptomatic and 20/20 who I ordered blood work for and had in the ER that night. Family doc said I may have saved her live. Hemoglobin was at 5.4, though you might not know what that means.

As far as the law. Patients can order glasses or CLs without ever seeing ANYONE. Those "opticians" in BC get part time classes over 6 months. Though you don't even need that to get someone an Rx from what I understand. Yeah, your regular high school grad really knows what is important concerning you eyes and health!

You should be proud you are doing your job and saving patient's lives! See, you are just like a real doctor, ordering bloodwork in the ER and everything. Sounds like you would even be willing to teach me to interpret a CBC, how sweet .

Keep doing what you're doing for your patients, but don't try to stop me from getting my eyes tested by an optician and placing my order from Clearly Contacts. I am an adult and don't need the government to make every choice for me or my family .

 

[dontlikephysics]

See, you are just like a real doctor,

And what exactly is a 'real doctor'?

 

[serenmoon]

See, you are just like a real doctor,

And what exactly is a 'real doctor'?

Whatever you want/need it to mean...

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

You should be proud you are doing your job and saving patient's lives! See, you are just like a real doctor, ordering bloodwork in the ER and everything. Sounds like you would even be willing to teach me to interpret a CBC, how sweet .

Keep doing what you're doing for your patients, but don't try to stop me from getting my eyes tested by an optician and placing my order from Clearly Contacts. I am an adult and don't need the government to make every choice for me or my family .

I'm an adult too, and I've decided I need to have easy access to a z-pack every time I get a URI. Stupid government rules.

Reality is IndianaOD's wife doesn't need a yearly pap unless she is HPV positive. This is a likely possibility.

The reality is that here in the US, the guidelines you speak of where only accepted by ACOG in November of last year. Prior to that, every OB/GYN I've ever worked with or known a female friend to go to very strongly suggested (basically required) a yearly pap before they'd write for another year of OCPs. Maybe Canada is different, but down here Indiana is describing how things were done up until 6 months ago quite accurately.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

I disagree with you entirely on this. My point was that opticians doing sight testing is not the same as patients buying anything OTC. Fail to see how that works against the point I'm making.

Your analogy goes better with IndianaODs point.

OK I read your post again and I think we've hit on a Canada/US difference. Down here, every MD/OD is required to give each patient (sometimes on request, sometimes with every new Rx even if not requested) a copy of the prescription without hassling or charge. If that's not the case in BC, then I can't disagree with that part of the law. So my bad there, I misinterpreted your post.

As for being a licensed and regulated profession, yes that's true. But, for my state, I just looked up the requirements. Then I looked up what a 2 year optician degree looked like. There is a single 3 hour course on ocular anatomy and a few common diseases, everything else is optics/fitting/making lenses/and so on. To my mind, that's like med school courses first year where they throw in occasional clinical correlations. That does not make one a diagnostician. Now, if there was an extra course that went over things like glaucoma screening guidelines, what to include in a ROS that, if positive, warrants referral, and an age after which referrals become necessary on at least an every 2-3 years basis then I might be OK with refraction and glasses Rx. I'm not sure I'd ever be OK with CL exams as, without a slit lamp, you might not notice some of the pathology that can go along with those.

 

[stonegoat]

OK I read your post again and I think we've hit on a Canada/US difference. Down here, every MD/OD is required to give each patient (sometimes on request, sometimes with every new Rx even if not requested) a copy of the prescription without hassling or charge. If that's not the case in BC, then I can't disagree with that part of the law. So my bad there, I misinterpreted your post.

As for being a licensed and regulated profession, yes that's true. But, for my state, I just looked up the requirements. Then I looked up what a 2 year optician degree looked like. There is a single 3 hour course on ocular anatomy and a few common diseases, everything else is optics/fitting/making lenses/and so on. To my mind, that's like med school courses first year where they throw in occasional clinical correlations. That does not make one a diagnostician. Now, if there was an extra course that went over things like glaucoma screening guidelines, what to include in a ROS that, if positive, warrants referral, and an age after which referrals become necessary on at least an every 2-3 years basis then I might be OK with refraction and glasses Rx. I'm not sure I'd ever be OK with CL exams as, without a slit lamp, you might not notice some of the pathology that can go along with those.

In BC, the optometry regulations state that a copy of the written spectacle Rx MUST be offered to the patient.

 

[stonegoat]

For those interested, go on the BC Association of Optometrists website and view all the letters that have been sent to Mr. Falcon in disagreement with his proposed regulation changes. Some pretty interesting stuff.

 

[Haystack]

but don't try to stop me from getting my eyes tested by an optician and placing my order from Clearly Contacts. I am an adult and don't need the government to make every choice for me or my family .

It seems that you're unclear about exactly how these new bullsh*t regulations will work for you. Let me "calmly" offer some help:

If you like the optician's glasses and contacts, then simply forget about you and your family's eye health and get the sight test there. They may even do it for free but probably not.

If you would rather go for some real crap glasses because that's good enough for your family, then forget about the sight test and just plug in all the numbers on the Clearly Contacts website. That way you can really save some money because there is no way that anyone will be doing free sight testing for people to walk out with the Rx. Plus, your numbers will likely be as accurate as the automated sight test anyhow.

All you have to do is decide which bad choice you like best and go for it.

 

[PBEA]

The thread is about laws in BC. Opticians are a regulated health profession there to my knowledge with training and licensing requirements. Whether 'medicine' or 'ophtho' is against stand alone refraction is not my concern and does not affect my opinion on the subject.

Like the rest of the public, you presume that all eye problems are always symptomatic, that problems manifest as blur, discomfort, etc. This is simply untrue, and conditions like glaucoma or diabetic retinopathy will VERY frequently have no symptom, and 20/20 vision. I recall reading a recent study on retinal tears, holes, and detachments that suggested that up to 50% of these present with NO SYMPTOM whatsoever! And that is just the tip of the iceberg. This is the WHOLE point of requiring proper examination when obtaining a refraction for glasses or contact lenses. It is ridiculous to suggest that an optician who has "training and licensing requirements" could recognize these conditions as abnormal. How on earth would they do that? Hell, non-ophthalmic MDs can't reliably discern eye problems, and you think a high school graduate can? What are you thinking? Now being a medical student I realize you don't know this but you should learn it, and fast, before you suggest to any of your family members (or patients) that they can save money by getting glasses online by skipping proper exam. Please make sure they get the exam, AND THEN they can go buy some cheap, crappy specs.

 

[dontlikephysics]

Like the rest of the public, you presume that all eye problems are always symptomatic, that problems manifest as blur, discomfort, etc. This is simply untrue, and conditions like glaucoma or diabetic retinopathy will VERY frequently have no symptom, and 20/20 vision. I recall reading a recent study on retinal tears, holes, and detachments that suggested that up to 50% of these present with NO SYMPTOM whatsoever! And that is just the tip of the iceberg. This is the WHOLE point of requiring proper examination when obtaining a refraction for glasses or contact lenses. It is ridiculous to suggest that an optician who has "training and licensing requirements" could recognize these conditions as abnormal. How on earth would they do that? Hell, non-ophthalmic MDs can't reliably discern eye problems, and you think a high school graduate can? What are you thinking? Now being a medical student I realize you don't know this but you should learn it, and fast, before you suggest to any of your family members (or patients) that they can save money by getting glasses online by skipping proper exam. Please make sure they get the exam, AND THEN they can go buy some cheap, crappy specs.

Best post I've read yet.

 

[IndianaOD]

Reality is IndianaOD's wife doesn't need a yearly pap unless she is HPV positive. This is a likely possibility.

Personal attacks from a little man? You are completely unprofessional and surprisingly unknowledgeable about medicine.

So answer the question: Why should my completely healthy wife (you tool) have to go to an OB for a birth control Rx? According to you we should be able to make that choice for ourselves. According to your logic all prescription meds should be de-regulated.

Who needs doctors or professionals of any kind. I'm just going to pick the med that has the best TV commercial.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Like the rest of the public, you presume that all eye problems are always symptomatic, that problems manifest as blur, discomfort, etc. This is simply untrue, and conditions like glaucoma or diabetic retinopathy will VERY frequently have no symptom, and 20/20 vision. I recall reading a recent study on retinal tears, holes, and detachments that suggested that up to 50% of these present with NO SYMPTOM whatsoever! And that is just the tip of the iceberg. This is the WHOLE point of requiring proper examination when obtaining a refraction for glasses or contact lenses. It is ridiculous to suggest that an optician who has "training and licensing requirements" could recognize these conditions as abnormal. How on earth would they do that? Hell, non-ophthalmic MDs can't reliably discern eye problems, and you think a high school graduate can? What are you thinking? Now being a medical student I realize you don't know this but you should learn it, and fast, before you suggest to any of your family members (or patients) that they can save money by getting glasses online by skipping proper exam. Please make sure they get the exam, AND THEN they can go buy some cheap, crappy specs.

As a guy who plans to refer about half of my patients to ODs, I wish you'd quit saying stuff like that. We don't claim to be as good as you guys, or even that close. But, I think there are a few eye problems we can generally handle.

 

[PBEA]

As a guy who plans to refer about half of my patients to ODs, I wish you'd quit saying stuff like that. We don't claim to be as good as you guys, or even that close. But, I think there are a few eye problems we can generally handle.

Having worked in several different multidisciplinary setting I agree with you. But with your history, you should know better then most, that the average PCP/pedes doc is going to be pretty limited in what they can accurately diagnose in the eye, and I don't consider shotgun therapy for "pink eye" as definitive care. As I've said before their approach is to essentially "play the numbers" (incidence/prevalence) based on superficial physical findings, and medical history. Its usually not terrible, and infrequently leads to significant harm, but lets be honest here, there are SOME bad ones slipping through the cracks. I know its a societal thing, but it suprises the hell out of me that the public even bothers their PCP with eye problems, when their is ample access to OMD or OD. Major disconnect their.

 

[IndianaOD]

As a guy who plans to refer about half of my patients to ODs, I wish you'd quit saying stuff like that. We don't claim to be as good as you guys, or even that close. But, I think there are a few eye problems we can generally handle.

I have great respect for most family and ER docs but VA Hopeful it is true that the huge majority have no clue when it comes to the eye. If a patient with a pink eye around here goes to a PCP MD or ER MD I can almost bet they are going to end up on gentamyacin and if there is any pain Vicodin. A good proportion of these are viral conjunctivitis with which an antibiotic is completely worthless and helps lead to resistant bugs.

It doesn't make sense that patients go to the ER or their family doc for an eye problem. It makes as much sense as coming to me for chest pain. It is not my specialty. I had a patient last week that was completely mismanaged by the ER. Yup gentamyacin and Vicodin. That visit will end up costing them around $500-$600 dollars.

If I'm having chest pain I'm heading to the fine docs at the ER. If I have a toothache I'm going to the dentist. Not my PCP or the ER.

I would like to return this thread back to the crazy issues in Canada.

 

[Kane2000]

I'm not an optometrist or an optometry student or a medical student. So I have no bias whatsoever.

These changes in law, if it were to happen where I live, would completely put me off from going to optometrist/optician for a refraction. I wouldn't be able to work out whose who. I would simply go to my family doc, get a referral to an ophthal and get my refraction done from her/him. That way I won't have to worry about whose qualified and whose not.

But it is indeed a great shame to see Canada destroying a profession they allowed to build many years ago. If they do hate optoms so much they should have not introduced an OD course at all and just let opticians and ophthals take care of the eyes. They are destroying the lives of these health professionals.

Lucky for me I'm in a field that doesn't have these threats. Thank god for that.

 

[Optogal]

http://www.optometrists.bc.ca/code/navigate.aspx?Id=177

"It is unbelievable that we will become the only jurisdiction in North America to allow automated refraction, and eyeglass and contact lens sales without verification of a prescription – a very sad day for consumers in British Columbia and for the professionals committed to delivering quality eye health."

I don't understand. Is refraction even controlled anymore under the new system?

The opticians "get" refraction, but if there is no need for verification of an Rx, does an optometrist/optician/MD even have to refract? Can the patient just order whatever Rx they like? In other words, ANYONE can refract now?

 

[Katalio]

http://www.optometrists.bc.ca/code/navigate.aspx?Id=177

"It is unbelievable that we will become the only jurisdiction in North America to allow automated refraction, and eyeglass and contact lens sales without verification of a prescription – a very sad day for consumers in British Columbia and for the professionals committed to delivering quality eye health."

I don't understand. Is refraction even controlled anymore under the new system?

The opticians "get" refraction, but if there is no need for verification of an Rx, does an optometrist/optician/MD even have to refract? Can the patient just order whatever Rx they like? In other words, ANYONE can refract now?

Opticians who are "certified" to refract are called Refracting Opticians. They use the Eyelogic system to produce a spectacle prescription. The Opticians are then required to give the px a report of the sight test. So technically, Opticians, OD's and OMD's are able to refract and give prescription. However, a supermarket can probably sell contact lenses and glasses now since clients will no longer need a valid Rx nor undergo any test to get contacts.

 

[serenmoon]

It seems that you're unclear about exactly how these new bullsh*t regulations will work for you. Let me "calmly" offer some help:

If you like the optician's glasses and contacts, then simply forget about you and your family's eye health and get the sight test there. They may even do it for free but probably not.

If you would rather go for some real crap glasses because that's good enough for your family, then forget about the sight test and just plug in all the numbers on the Clearly Contacts website. That way you can really save some money because there is no way that anyone will be doing free sight testing for people to walk out with the Rx. Plus, your numbers will likely be as accurate as the automated sight test anyhow.

All you have to do is decide which bad choice you like best and go for it.

How was I unclear? I do get my glasses and contacts from clearlycontacts/coastalcontacts with no problems whatsoever. You have described the system accurately, I go to the website, type in my prescription, choose my product, and they overnight them to me. Simple as pie. I see better than 20/15 in my glasses. Also my drug plan provides a coupon code for an extra 10% off my order at clearlycontacts. I'm not complaining...

Best of luck to all the BC optometrists. Let's get real-optometrist services are largely paid for by government and private insurance. As long as ppl are still insured for these services, optometrists will continue to do well. It would be different if government was no longer paying for exams under 19, over 65 and if private insurance was no longer reimbursing eye exams and vision correction. I would be surprised if BC OD's noticed any change at all in their bottom line.

 

[Optogal]

Opticians who are "certified" to refract are called Refracting Opticians. They use the Eyelogic system to produce a spectacle prescription. The Opticians are then required to give the px a report of the sight test. So technically, Opticians, OD's and OMD's are able to refract and give prescription. However, a supermarket can probably sell contact lenses and glasses now since clients will no longer need a valid Rx nor undergo any test to get contacts.

I get what you say, but if no one needs a "valid Rx" to buy CLs (and glasses?), can ANYONE refract? Or only the three Os can refract, but you can still order whatever Rx you want?

 

[serenmoon]

Sounds like you're over-minused.

I think you're right...

How much do you wanna bet 'Eyelogic' would have given me a more accurate prescription than my optometrist did...LOL...

 

[PBEA]

I think you're right...

How much do you wanna bet 'Eyelogic' would have given me a more accurate prescription than my optometrist did...LOL...

spoken like an uneducated troll, thanks for reinforcing what I've known all along. That laypeople need to be protected from themselves (this includes you).

 

[ibalz]

I think you're right...

How much do you wanna bet 'Eyelogic' would have given me a more accurate prescription than my optometrist did...LOL...

Hey, Indiana, sounds like serenmoon's parent should've gotten her pap smear to get her BC Rx but didn't....and look at the result!


Just take a look at his posting history.... He likes to troll optometry & pharmacy threads. only 18 of his 58 posts are actually related to medicine. Some "medical student". Let's not feed the douche.......err.......troll.

 

[IndianaOD]

I have to be honest though. Canadians should not be proud of their political system. In cases like these there are no checks and balances. Here we have ONE guy with questionable connections to an internet retailer who can change an entire medical system.

Canadian MDs better hope this guy doesn't get some cash under the table from some internet pharmacy. Could just deregulate all prescription meds.

 

[Dogod]

Another indication of how politics works in BC.

Just earlier this year (Falcon let one of his underlings respond instead of doing it himself):
http://www.straight.com/article-2804...oup?page=0%2C0

Essentially the BC government is in the process of sinking Therapeutic Index, an independent drug research organization which provides unbiased, evidence based information on drug therapies to physicians via the "Therapeutic Letter."

Excerpts:
The Pharmaceutical Task Force was composed of nine clinical professionals, academics, industry leaders, and policymakers. Five of the nine had ties to the pharmaceutical industry at the time the PTF’s review of the TI was performed...(then 1 more was hired by a Pharm company afterwards)...
From 2005 to the end of 2008, LifeSciences B.C.’s members (a BigPharma lobby group) donated more than $750,000 to the B.C. Liberal party, according to records at Elections B.C....
Alan Cassels, a drug-policy researcher at the University of Victoria, described the PTF as the equivalent of hiring experts supplied by the tobacco industry to instruct the government on how to regulate smoking.

 

[Haystack]

Check this out:

http://www.visionsoptical.com/free-vision-examination

This has got to be borderline misleading/false advertising. Although they're saying its not a health evaluation, I don't see the words "sight-test" anywhere. And using "examination" - talk about preying on public ignorance. Also, sure looks like opticians are trained at least as extensively as a lowly optometrist. Thanks for modernizing the delivery of eyecare in B.C. Mr. Falcon.

 

[socal2014]

Know the Facts: If you can see the difference between an apple and an orange, then you are capable of understanding the difference between a Vision Examination and an eye exam and will be able to make a choice that is right for you.



What is the Difference?


An eye exam is a procedure which determines your prescription for eyeglasses and is a health check of your eyes. This type of exam at the Optometrist will cost you anywhere from $80.00 to $120.00 or higher.



A Vision Examination is not a health exam. A Vision Examination does, however, determine your prescription for eyeglasses so that you will be able to see better. This test is free of charge if you are purchasing your eyewear from us. Why pay when all you need is to sharpen up your prescription?



Ophthalmologists are eye physicians who diagnose diseases of the eye, prescribe medicines, and perform surgery to correct vision disorders.



Opticians are eye care professionals with at least two years of College certified training. Opticians are licensed by the B.C. College of Opticians and must adhere to the B.C. Health Act. Opticians are trained in the precise fitting of prescription lenses.



Continuing education is mandatory for the Optician to maintain their license. This component ensures that the Opticians have knowledge of the most up to date Optical technology, including Auto Refraction certification which certifies an Optician to perform a Vision Examination.



Optometrists do eye exams and examine the health of your eyes for a fee. If you have any signs of disease, the Optometrist will refer you to a Doctor/Ophthalmologist for treatment. After the eye exam, your prescription is yours to have filled at the service provider of your choice.



The Facts on a Vision Examination



- A Vision Examination is FREE if you purchase your eyewear from us. If you do not, there is a small fee of $49.00.


- A Vision Examination is performed by a trained Licensed Optician who is governed by the B.C. College of Opticians and the B.C. Health Act. The Optician performing the Vision Examination is certified in Auto Refraction.



- Vision Examinations are very accurate; millions have been performed with excellent results.



- You qualify for a Vision Examination if you are a healthy adult between the ages of 19-64, have had a full eye exam in the last five years, and have no other health conditions that affect your eyes.



- Vision Examinations are guaranteed. If for any reason you require an adjustment to your prescription, the lenses are re-made for you Free of charge.

 

[socal2014]

WTF is the purpose of having a AOA/COA, when they do not do anything?

 

[KHE]

WTF is the purpose of having a AOA/COA, when they do not do anything?

They essentially can't do anything other than lobby legislators. Anything else is (or they say it is) anti-trust.

 

[socal2014]

Sure they can.

Can they not advertise the difference between opticians and optometrists?

I am serious, I have seen several coastal contact ad's on buses. It was so good, I almost went online to check out what types of frames they had etc.

Lobbying legislators is not going to do anything, just look at what happened to BC. I have read that members of BC's board of optometrists didn't even have a clue about the new regulations that the province was considering. The COA has gone as far as writing a simple letter to the "HONORABLE" kevin falcon detailing the negatives of the newly administered regulations, while coastal contacts donates thousands of dollars.

The coa is a joke; they are unable to maintain the integrity of the very profession they represent.

 

[Optogal]

I wonder if we'll start seeing opticians here on the optometry forums.