Negatives of Optometry profession: An Honest Look

[terry2356]

I am a first year university student currently residing in Canada.
I am currently looking at optometry as a possible profession. There is only one optometry school here so the competition is extremely tough.Every career has its pros and cons but I would appreciate if I could get honest opinions about cons of this career from practicing OD's or students in this profession. Here are few questions and facts to get started.

Currently the only optometry school in Canada is Waterloo and they say average salary is 70-80k excluding benefits which I find is little bit on the low end...?

Around what GPA do optometry schools in USA accept students on average? Is it much more difficult for a Canadian student to gain admission to school in US.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Bioflare]

First off, Waterloo is the only English spoken Optometry School in Canada. Montreal has a French Optometry school, but only allows you to practice within Quebec.

If you apply early enough in the cycle, around july aug you should be fine with a 3.0-3.3 cGPA (Science) and OAT of 310-330.

Here's a pdf of the profiles of the entering class.
http://www.opted.org/files/public/Profile_of_Entering_Class_2009.pdf

First thing with Optometry schools, cGPA is the most important, the higher yours is the better chance. Now this doesn't mean you can slack on your OAT, just get all your scores above 300.

But if your cGPA isn't that high you want to focus on getting experience in the field, either volunteering or part time work + shadowing. And an OAT score that is higher, 350+ makes you stand out.

For average salary, I'd say that's the starting pay you get when you first come out, but that isn't the norm. Most probably you will be working at a commercial practice unless you have some connections. The commercial practices usually offer between 80-100k contract with paid vacation etc. Your other choice would be to lease yourself as an OD to many optical stores. The only benefit I see for this is that you can arrange how many patients you see (not churning them out like in commercial) and you can make some friends in the business a long the way. One of the Optometrists I shadowed does this while saving up to open his practice, his net is around 130K.

Private practice if you do it right nets you 150k+ but there is no one that can tell you the best way to do it.

CONS:
US Optom school is EXPENSIVE:
If you're a Canadian Citizen Waterloo = 12k/year | US schools range from 28-40k/year
After living expenses all factored in total schooling will put you back close to 185K-230K (safe estimate).

You won't be living frivolously when you graduate due to the debt you'll have. But this is the case with most health professions.

Oversupply*? This is the case is many many professions, go look in other forums you'll see it. Walk into a Pharmacy and ask the residing Pharmacist about it. It'll be up to you to deal with this, my pharmacist friends only focus on getting on good terms with the regional managers for the drug stores like Shoppers Drug Mart. Because once they show they can do well with 1 store they'll give them responsibility and chance at shares at other stores = $$

But seriously why not just walk into any Optometrists office and ask them their honest opinion. It'll help and may change your view of things.

 

[arahnisarahn]

second that

 

[KHE]

I am a first year university student currently residing in Canada.
I am currently looking at optometry as a possible profession. There is only one optometry school here so the competition is extremely tough.Every career has its pros and cons but I would appreciate if I could get honest opinions about cons of this career from practicing OD's or students in this profession. Here are few questions and facts to get started.

Currently the only optometry school in Canada is Waterloo and they say average salary is 70-80k excluding benefits which I find is little bit on the low end...?

Around what GPA do optometry schools in USA accept students on average? Is it much more difficult for a Canadian student to gain admission to school in US.

I would say that one of the larger negatives of this field (any health care field, really) beyond the obvious insurance hassles etc. etc is the fact that as a practice owner, only I can do the work. No one else can do it. I'm the one with the license. No one else picks up the slack.

This, coupled with the fact that I see patients by appointment makes it frustrating sometimes. I have to be there. In the office.

Now, I can (and do) schedule time off and that's fine but it's not the kind of career where you can say "oh well, I don't feel so hot today. I'm going to call out sick and I'll just work from home, or I'll work late tomorrow night, I'll work on the weekend to get this "project" done or whatever."

Or "wow. The weather's great today. I think I'll play 18 this morning and just stay late tonight." It doesn't work that way. If you want to play 18, you gotta schedule it.

If I'm not there, the place makes no money.

 

[Commando303]

I am a first year university student currently residing in Canada.
I am currently looking at optometry as a possible profession. There is only one optometry school here so the competition is extremely tough.Every career has its pros and cons but I would appreciate if I could get honest opinions about cons of this career from practicing OD's or students in this profession. Here are few questions and facts to get started.

Currently the only optometry school in Canada is Waterloo and they say average salary is 70-80k excluding benefits which I find is little bit on the low end...?

Around what GPA do optometry schools in USA accept students on average? Is it much more difficult for a Canadian student to gain admission to school in US.

Just browse this forum: bitching about the "ills of optometry" is its bread and butter; there need not to be another thread on it just because the word "honest" is bolded.

 

[Visionary]

I would say that one of the larger negatives of this field (any health care field, really) beyond the obvious insurance hassles etc. etc is the fact that as a practice owner, only I can do the work. No one else can do it. I'm the one with the license. No one else picks up the slack.

This, coupled with the fact that I see patients by appointment makes it frustrating sometimes. I have to be there. In the office.

Now, I can (and do) schedule time off and that's fine but it's not the kind of career where you can say "oh well, I don't feel so hot today. I'm going to call out sick and I'll just work from home, or I'll work late tomorrow night, I'll work on the weekend to get this "project" done or whatever."

Or "wow. The weather's great today. I think I'll play 18 this morning and just stay late tonight." It doesn't work that way. If you want to play 18, you gotta schedule it.

If I'm not there, the place makes no money.

You're absolutely correct, KHE. What you state here holds true not only for nearly all private practice health care, but for a lot of other small businesses, for that matter. As "the doc," you do always have to be there. I have technicians that call in sick here and there--doesn't really disturb things. If I'm out, my staff, lease, utilities, etc. still get paid, though I'm generating no revenue. Honestly, I think the only time I've called in sick in the last 7 years (combined internship, residency, fellowship, and practice) was when I was vomiting uncontrollably once from a stomach virus. Even planned time off, such as vacation, is a revenue loser. Take the cost of your vacation and add in the overhead and lost revenue for that period--that's the true cost of your vacation. Necessary, of course, but makes me cringe to think about it sometimes. Just part of being a small business owner!

 

[Commando303]

I would say that one of the larger negatives of this field (any health care field, really) beyond the obvious insurance hassles etc. etc is the fact that as a practice owner, only I can do the work. No one else can do it. I'm the one with the license. No one else picks up the slack.

This, coupled with the fact that I see patients by appointment makes it frustrating sometimes. I have to be there. In the office.

Now, I can (and do) schedule time off and that's fine but it's not the kind of career where you can say "oh well, I don't feel so hot today. I'm going to call out sick and I'll just work from home, or I'll work late tomorrow night, I'll work on the weekend to get this "project" done or whatever."

Or "wow. The weather's great today. I think I'll play 18 this morning and just stay late tonight." It doesn't work that way. If you want to play 18, you gotta schedule it.

If I'm not there, the place makes no money.

Did something keep you away from the group-practice model? As I understand, many practitioners, nowadays (2011), favor this structure, not only for its ability to let the doctors share costs, but for that of its letting them share responsibility.

 

[KHE]

Did something keep you away from the group-practice model? As I understand, many practitioners, nowadays (2011), favor this structure, not only for its ability to let the doctors share costs, but for that letting them share responsibility.

I actually HAVE a partner so I'm NOT affected by that situation nearly as much as solo practitioners. If I'm out for a few days, my partner is here and the place at least still makes SOME money. Not as much as if I WERE here but it's not as difficult to get away as if you are solo.

The major point I was trying to make though is not lack of vacation. It's the fact that ONLY YOU can do the work. And you must do it at specific times.

 

[PBEA]

while KHE's point about being married to your office is valid, I think that relatively speaking, for optometry at least, this is a minor point. Of course the grass is always greener, but I think out of the health providers out there optometry has got to be one of the most embattled. ODs are constantly embroiled in one conflict or another, and depending on how close you are to it, or how it may affect your practice and/or livelihood, this may cause some stress, and/or problems with job satisfaction. If you are inclined to ignore some of these problems (very commonly done by ODs), or can justify and/or rationalize them, and can manage to do so, then perhaps it will have little impact.

 

[Optogal]

Currently the only optometry school in Canada is Waterloo and they say average salary is 70-80k excluding benefits which I find is little bit on the low end...?

The lack of benefits is true, but the 70-80K is what the amount they pay taxes on. I presume the average GROSS is far in excess of that, but after all expenses and write-offs, the only pay taxes on 70-80K.

Everyone who is a small business owner will be generous in their tax deductions, so view the 70-80K with a grain of salt.

 

[NCiDOC]

To answer the original question about cons in optometry as a business in Canada versus the US, here is my comment:
1. Canadian ODs have a much tougher time than US ODs making money because of the laws there. Refraction stations that do not require annual exams, laws that are not as medically friendly, etc. - those things take away from some of the revenue streams in an eye care business. It also does the patients a huge disservice.
2. The cons about the profession are much like any medical profession - appointment based, changes related to new health care laws, competition from other sources, constantly changing outlook with the profession.
3. I could use that same list and make them pros however. Appointment based means that you do not have patients coming any old time they please. It also allows you to control the time you want to be in the office and when you don't. Health care laws can be opportunities for new growth depending on how they change. Competition keeps you on your toes and makes practice more interesting. The constantly changing outlook of the profession is one of the reasons I love it. We will never be bored. I always let new doctors and staff in my practice know that we will always be training and changing because the profession and our patients demand it.
Good luck with your decision.

 

[Shnurek]

KHE can't you hire an ophthalmic technician to have them do Goldman applanation tonometry or use a tonopen, do the pre-testing, vision screening, and even use a slit lamp to examine the anterior segment? A lot of ophthalmology practices do that while the ophthalmologist just sits in his office on the phone or is doing LASIK in the OR. For about one OMD they can have up to 4-5 technicians doing all that. Even prescribing drugs.

 

[Visionary]

KHE can't you hire an ophthalmic technician to have them do Goldman applanation tonometry or use a tonopen, do the pre-testing, vision screening, and even use a slit lamp to examine the anterior segment? A lot of ophthalmology practices do that while the ophthalmologist just sits in his office on the phone or is doing LASIK in the OR. For about one OMD they can have up to 4-5 technicians doing all that. Even prescribing drugs.

I sure hope you're joking. If not, you don't know what you're talking about or what point KHE was making.

 

[Shnurek]

I would say that one of the larger negatives of this field (any health care field, really) beyond the obvious insurance hassles etc. etc is the fact that as a practice owner, only I can do the work. No one else can do it. I'm the one with the license. No one else picks up the slack.

I was just referring to this statement. No, I am not joking as I worked for a LASIK practice that the OMD just had all the ophthalmic technicians do all the menial work. And yes I realize for the ophthalmic technicians to do this, a doctor has to be present in the office although what they can do varies from state to state.

 

[Commando303]

KHE can't you hire an ophthalmic technician to have them do Goldman applanation tonometry or use a tonopen, do the pre-testing, vision screening, and even use a slit lamp to examine the anterior segment? A lot of ophthalmology practices do that while the ophthalmologist just sits in his office on the phone or is doing LASIK in the OR. For about one OMD they can have up to 4-5 technicians doing all that. Even prescribing drugs.

I was just referring to this statement. No, I am not joking as I worked for a LASIK practice that the OMD just had all the ophthalmic technicians do all the menial work. And yes I realize for the ophthalmic technicians to do this, a doctor has to be present in the office although what they can do varies from state to state.

I won't suggest you're mistaken in what you're reporting, but (and maybe I'm speaking from ignorance or bias) it strikes me as extremely questionable to have technicians perform anterior-seg. assessments with a slit-lamp. Throwing a pt. behind an N.C.T. or an auto-ref. is, I think, well within the training of a tech., but some of the stuff you've mentioned requires not only manipulation of instruments, but an ability to make calls to what is and is not significant. To my feeling, this sort of work should be done by the doctor.

 

[socal2014]

I am a first year university student currently residing in Canada.
I am currently looking at optometry as a possible profession. There is only one optometry school here so the competition is extremely tough.Every career has its pros and cons but I would appreciate if I could get honest opinions about cons of this career from practicing OD's or students in this profession. Here are few questions and facts to get started.

Currently the only optometry school in Canada is Waterloo and they say average salary is 70-80k excluding benefits which I find is little bit on the low end...?

Around what GPA do optometry schools in USA accept students on average? Is it much more difficult for a Canadian student to gain admission to school in US.

Expect to earn even lower than $80k since there will be more graduates than ever taking up all the good jobs!

You may survive though, if you work several part time jobs or perhaps find a busy walmart.

Just a fraction of the truth.

 

[Visionary]

I won't suggest you're mistaken in what you're reporting, but (and maybe I'm speaking from ignorance or bias) it strikes me as extremely questionable to have technicians perform anterior-seg. assessments with a slit-lamp. Throwing a pt. behind an N.C.T. or an auto-ref. is, I think, well within the training of a tech., but some of the stuff you've mentioned requires not only manipulation of instruments, but an ability to make calls to what is and is not significant. To my feeling, this sort of work should be done by the doctor.

That was my point. I (and most ophthalmologists I know) have technicians who check vision, do tonometry, refract (I frequently do a post dilation streak refraction to check, and I trust some technicians more than others), do measurements/imaging, and dilate. They never do slit lamp exams, and any questionable rapd or motility issue, as well as ocular inflammation, is checked by me prior to dilation. I've never seen an ophthalmologist rely on a technician for anterior segment exams (or independently prescribe drugs!) and would actually consider it malpractice.

 

[mintyjulep]

I was just referring to this statement. No, I am not joking as I worked for a LASIK practice that the OMD just had all the ophthalmic technicians do all the menial work. And yes I realize for the ophthalmic technicians to do this, a doctor has to be present in the office although what they can do varies from state to state.

Sounds illegal.

 

[Hoffy]

I am a tech now and I actually would be shocked if my responsibilities were to prescribe and make calls on slit-lamp findings........😱

 

[KHE]

KHE can't you hire an ophthalmic technician to have them do Goldman applanation tonometry or use a tonopen, do the pre-testing, vision screening, and even use a slit lamp to examine the anterior segment? A lot of ophthalmology practices do that while the ophthalmologist just sits in his office on the phone or is doing LASIK in the OR. For about one OMD they can have up to 4-5 technicians doing all that. Even prescribing drugs.

I use techs to do a lot of things but I have to actually examine the patient and I have to make the final decision and that means that I have to be in the office with the patient.

Your statement about an ophthalmologist relying on technicians to "examine the anterior segment" is very alarming.

The part about prescribing drugs is even more alarming.

Can you explain that more? I've seen people rely on techs to do penlight examination of angles before dilating them but I've never heard of a technician doing actual exams and prescribing. What's that all about? 😕

 

[thecgrblue]

Expect to earn even lower than $80k since there will be more graduates than ever taking up all the good jobs!

You may survive though, if you work several part time jobs or perhaps find a busy walmart.

Just a fraction of the truth.

There are two reasons you post:
a) you have nothing better to do
b) you are so concerned with your own abilities to get into optometry school and then succeed in the profession that you hope to dissuade as many potential-students as possible to make your chances any little bit higher

 

[Shnurek]

Let me provide more details,

Indirectly prescribing for example Xanax for pre-LASIK preparation or something like that. The tech just rights it down and the OMD signed off on it without giving it too much thought. One of the OR nurses would ask if a patient wants Xanax/Valium and if the patient said yes she would give it to them. These are only fragments of what I witnessed. Maybe the OMD read the patient's chart before giving the go-ahead for the OR nurse to continue her interaction with the patient, not sure.

I was only a tech at that practice for a few weeks (because it was a LASIK mill) but most of the techs seemed quite arrogant. As in patients would call them "doctor" but they would never correct the patients.

In any case, I did see techs using slit lamps and if I were a patient I would not be able to tell who is the Medical Doctor and who is a GED Technician. I am not sure what they looked for in their SL exam or their procedure but I heard some OMD's saying on these forums that 90% of what an optometrist can do can be performed by an ophthalmic tech. I don't agree with that but I was just commenting on my personal experience.

 

[socal2014]

Instead of talking about whether or not having techs doing optometric work is legal, profitable or ethical, we should be focusing on the gross over saturation that is present in optometry, including the negative effects of corporate giants on optometry and the involvement of managed care in our fees.

Most new grads will not be able to afford a tech, let alone a practice.

 

[Shnurek]

Instead of talking about whether or not having techs doing optometric work is legal, profitable or ethical, we should be focusing on the gross over saturation that is present in optometry, including the negative effects of corporate giants on optometry and the involvement of managed care in our fees.

Most new grads will not be able to afford a tech, let alone a practice.

Goddamit socal, whats your life story? I want to really know why you keep doing this. Are you in a southern california optometry school? Do you hate the fact that there are 3 optometry schools in your state? Will you have 200k of 6.8% debt after your 4 years? Do all your MD / DDS friends make fun of you?

Yes, we get it. California sucks for most optometrists.

I plan to practice in one of the rocky mountain states so I really don't care about oversupply and corporate giants. I am sure the laws over there are more lenient too when it comes to managed care/scope of practice/insurance issues.

 

[Taven7755]

With all due respect to everyone that frequents this forum, it must be understood that socal has never, in all of his/her 200+ posts, said anything that anyone was better off from hearing....It is basically a borderline student that has never spent a single day as a doctor, will always refuse to tell where they are (or if they are simply a reject of optometry) or what level they are at, and derides anyone that disagrees with their simpleton mantra of "oversupply, corporate, managed care....repeat, repeat, repeat" or personal insult, regardless of your level of knowledge...so it is really best to just ignore it. It is no different than asking one of your techs what they think.

Now that the adults can talk, the reality is that the corporate hold has been stagnant since about 2007. Their market share has declined (a very mediocre 3%) since 2007, due to the recession causing a lot of retail opticals to close. As anyone that has spent time in corporate will tell you, there is a TON of overhead to a place like that, so almost any decline in patients will cause the parent company to pull the plug. This is not news. Springfield MO, as an example of an Everytown USA (where I once teched) has seen 2 pearle visions close, the Mall Lenscrafters close, and 2 other local franchises....the only survivors were private OD's that had a built up base to survive the recession.

Don't take my word for it: http://www.optometric.com/printarticle.aspx?article=103858
or
http://www.companiesandmarkets.com/...metrist-us-market-research-profile-414129.asp

While this trend is negotiable in its veracity (their definition of "private" is iffy), the market for eye care is expected to grow by 24% by 2018. Even with the new schools, the growth of grads at about 1200 per years does not breech this gap in demand. I am simply telling you what gov Labor and Statistics has in their 2011 edition. Sorry if I believe that over someone's opinion on their own ineptitude. (I'm sure someone will say that it is unreliable, but their estimates from 2005 of optometry jobs was UNDER-estimated,so they are not exactly shills) The downers in here make it all sound rather pathetic most of the time. It is the SAME 3 scapegoats, all day, every day, here on SDN....

Want to know why it doesn't change? Here is an example:

When the Florida Optometric Assoc wanted to fight a bill that came out 2 months ago (house bill 549), a bill that would give opticians refraction rights (an absurd idea to most anyone), they sent out an email to their list serv, made phone calls, etc, doing a "calling all cars" to the OD's of Florida.

The response?

10 donations. Read that again. TEN!!!!
In my state, optometry has a grand total of 3 real lobbyists....this to fight in the 300+ range that the AMA employs....so if people want change, ACTUAL change, then do something about it. The BIG 3 (oversupply, managed care, corporate) are completely dead horses that get ripped to shreds when brought up in an actual discussion against people using facts. The BIG 3 is a fastball down the middle in a congressional chamber, as evidenced countless times and said to me, point black, by a lobbyist my group met with in Tallahassee recently...If you don't believe me, look into the floor testimony in Ohio from 2-3 years ago when a lobbyist tried to argue that in order to expand scope...they got mauled....what DID win it was the argument over access, cost, and level of training we get. That is the argument that was used in KY, and that will be used more and more as state govs try to cut back on deficits....so for once, someone please use the arguments that are building us up, rather than the pathetic old loser of an argument that is the BIG 3. No one is better from hearing it. It accomplishes nothing and never has.

My gosh sometimes SDN just sounds like a massive pity party for everyone with an axe to grind. (that is called the internet I guess) It's useless and so tiresome....thanks.

 

[KHE]

Don't take my word for it: http://www.optometric.com/printarticle.aspx?article=103858
or
http://www.companiesandmarkets.com/...metrist-us-market-research-profile-414129.asp

While this trend is negotiable in its veracity (their definition of "private" is iffy), the market for eye care is expected to grow by 24% by 2018. Even with the new schools, the growth of grads at about 1200 per years does not breech this gap in demand. I am simply telling you what gov Labor and Statistics has in their 2011 edition. Sorry if I believe that over someone's opinion on their own ineptitude. (I'm sure someone will say that it is unreliable, but their estimates from 2005 of optometry jobs was UNDER-estimated,so they are not exactly shills) The downers in here make it all sound rather pathetic most of the time. It is the SAME 3 scapegoats, all day, every day, here on SDN....

There's a problem with your argument there.....

Assuming that it's accurate that the "demand" for eyecare will increase by 24% in the next 7 years, what evidence is there, if any that it will be demand for OPTOMETRIC services or that OPTOMETRY will be the ones to meet that demand?

People in optometry have been harping about baby boomers for years now claiming that their oncoming rush of cataracts and diabetic disease will be some sort of optometric gold mine.

Well.....baby boomers have been in the optometric system for 25 years. Since the time they became presbyopic. Also, optometrists don't treat cataracts.

So I remain skeptical of any claimed spike in demand for optometric services.

 

[Taven7755]

No, my argument was not centered on the idea that there ARE no problems, or that these demand curves are 100% accurate. With this said, there is indeed too much focus on the "baby boomers" as if they are the cohort that we are most reliant upon....seeing guys in their 50's and giving them adds is not what pays the bills generally anyway, it is disposable income and the marketing that we do. We are not the post office. Demand is not fixed at a certain number; more it is a fluid thing that we can CHANGE if we would just get our act together.

The premise of my argument is that the "BIG 3" of oversupply, managed care, and corporate optometry are non-starters as far as enacting real change that will make a difference for the profession. These arguments have and will continue to get crushed when brought up into any levers of change we might have, whether that be state laws or insurance panels. The simple fact remains that the population cohort of 20-40 year old has larger populations on the OLDER side (the boomers) and on the younger side (higher immigration in 80's and 90's that has recently fallen off)....so the idea that we 20-40 year olds that are the present and future of the profession are in some huge oversupply, as the "work force" age is surpassed on both sides of my cohort. There will be a temporary "worker crush" for about the next 4-5 years, as there are currently a ver large part of the boomer cohort that is still in the workforce. When these people begin to retire, across the economy, the argument goes that there will need to be enough people to fill the breech. This is not my argument. It has been used countless times in congressional chambers, in the defense of many professions and their concerns.

Outside of this, my point is that optometry does not stick together, does not support their leadership well, and instead harps on their BIG 3 and no real lobby funding to go get mauled in actual discussions against people in power using facts. Again, this is not my opinion. I am only reporting what has happened over the past decade in my state and across the country. I am just tired of how predictable and repetitive the ideas that I see here on SDN are, and how far off they are from the discussions that I hear when I speak to people trying to fix things. (I.E. Dr. Marciano, an OD that tried to run for state house down here in Palm Beach) These people have real ideas, talk about real areas for change, and DO something about it. We are incohesive unhearded cats that just run the same dead arguments amongst each other day after day. This the real negative of optometry....

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

Let me provide more details,

Indirectly prescribing for example Xanax for pre-LASIK preparation or something like that. The tech just rights it down and the OMD signed off on it without giving it too much thought. One of the OR nurses would ask if a patient wants Xanax/Valium and if the patient said yes she would give it to them. These are only fragments of what I witnessed. Maybe the OMD read the patient's chart before giving the go-ahead for the OR nurse to continue her interaction with the patient, not sure.

I was only a tech at that practice for a few weeks (because it was a LASIK mill) but most of the techs seemed quite arrogant. As in patients would call them "doctor" but they would never correct the patients.

In any case, I did see techs using slit lamps and if I were a patient I would not be able to tell who is the Medical Doctor and who is a GED Technician. I am not sure what they looked for in their SL exam or their procedure but I heard some OMD's saying on these forums that 90% of what an optometrist can do can be performed by an ophthalmic tech. I don't agree with that but I was just commenting on my personal experience.

I've often seen techs prepare Rx for patient based on what the usual protocol is and the doctor will sign it knowing exactly what it is and why. This is something I've seen in practices that only really do a few things.

Second, asking then administering meds at time of surgery can be a protocol based decision. Same kinda thing happens at the OB clinic we staff for certain things.

 

[Visionary]

Let me provide more details,

Indirectly prescribing for example Xanax for pre-LASIK preparation or something like that. The tech just rights it down and the OMD signed off on it without giving it too much thought. One of the OR nurses would ask if a patient wants Xanax/Valium and if the patient said yes she would give it to them. These are only fragments of what I witnessed. Maybe the OMD read the patient's chart before giving the go-ahead for the OR nurse to continue her interaction with the patient, not sure.

I was only a tech at that practice for a few weeks (because it was a LASIK mill) but most of the techs seemed quite arrogant. As in patients would call them "doctor" but they would never correct the patients.

In any case, I did see techs using slit lamps and if I were a patient I would not be able to tell who is the Medical Doctor and who is a GED Technician. I am not sure what they looked for in their SL exam or their procedure but I heard some OMD's saying on these forums that 90% of what an optometrist can do can be performed by an ophthalmic tech. I don't agree with that but I was just commenting on my personal experience.

Aw, come on Shnurek! Your posts generally are pretty well thought out, but I must take issue with your line of discussion here. What you're describing is a common practice for most ophthalmic surgery. Patients are routinely prescribed a mild sedative prior to an invasive procedure during which they will be awake. You make the fact that the technician fills it out and the doc signs it sound like some sort of crime. I assure you that the doc knows exactly what's going on. As for the slit lamp "exams," some of my technicians perform applanation tonometry. They may even bring some potential anterior segment findings to my attention, but they are not doing anything that would be considered an exam. That's my job. As for the attitude and arrogance of those technicians, hey some people are just like that. Why should that reflect on the doc? Oh, and the post you paraphrased was from a med student on the ophthalmology board, who has demonstrated his ignorance on multiple occasions, and it was soundly denounced by multiple other posters, including me.

 

[Shnurek]

Aw, come on Shnurek! Your posts generally are pretty well thought out, but I must take issue with your line of discussion here. What you're describing is a common practice for most ophthalmic surgery.

Yea, I was just recounting my experience and other posters mentioned it was borderline illegal according to them. I was curious of this myself when it comes to ophthalmologists. I guess I should have specified that the doctor makes the final call.

I am wondering though how much can a technician for an optometrist do? Can they do just as much as you described in your office? Tonometry, simple SL exams, administering eye drops?

 

[Visionary]

Yea, I was just recounting my experience and other posters mentioned it was borderline illegal according to them. I was curious of this myself when it comes to ophthalmologists. I guess I should have specified that the doctor makes the final call.

I am wondering though how much can a technician for an optometrist do? Can they do just as much as you described in your office? Tonometry, simple SL exams, administering eye drops?

See the following link for descriptions of what COA, COT, and COMT are certified to do: http://www.jcahpo.org/certification/coa.aspx

I don't know if a difference exists for technicians in an optometrist's office.

 

[socal2014]

Why do threads always evolve into and OMD vs. OD debate?

We get it. OMD's are far superior to Optometrists because they are capable of performing surgery among other things.

But, that should not change the fact that there are several issues in Optometry which go unaddressed by some of the most wisest posters on these boards.

If one cares to examine a career in Optometry, one only need look at the issues:

a)Corporate optometry, also know as Walmart and Sams club, which will taint your image in the eyes of the public, from a well-respected doctor, to just a glorified technician who does eye exams next to the recycle department.

b)Managed Care, which will, logically, lower your reimbursements. In fact, Managed Care is probably the larges issue of them all, as most doctors are fooled into believing that managed care works for them. In basic terms, managed care reimburses the doctor a set fee for a set procedure - only the fee amount will quickly diminish.

c)Oversupply. Whats better than having an office amidst 5 OD's and 2 OMD's? Well, having an office amidst 4 OD's and 2 OMD's, duh!

I challenge any poster on here to argue these facts. Many have proven to show no knowledge about optometric economics and its affairs, but I give you yet another chance.

For the pre-optometry students doubting these issues, you will regret it. It is very true and most informed doctors can attest to it, but do not digest the information that Optometry schools feed you, as they just want your money. For the few doctors who refuse to come in reality with said issues, I say to you, man up ask not what the profession can do for you, but what you can do for the profession.

 

[mintyjulep]

Why do threads always evolve into and OMD vs. OD debate?

We get it. OMD's are far superior to Optometrists because they are capable of performing surgery among other things.

But, that should not change the fact that there are several issues in Optometry which go unaddressed by some of the most wisest posters on these boards.

If one cares to examine a career in Optometry, one only need look at the issues:

a)Corporate optometry, also know as Walmart and Sams club, which will taint your image in the eyes of the public, from a well-respected doctor, to just a glorified technician who does eye exams next to the recycle department.

b)Managed Care, which will, logically, lower your reimbursements. In fact, Managed Care is probably the larges issue of them all, as most doctors are fooled into believing that managed care works for them. In basic terms, managed care reimburses the doctor a set fee for a set procedure - only the fee amount will quickly diminish.

c)Oversupply. Whats better than having an office amidst 5 OD's and 2 OMD's? Well, having an office amidst 4 OD's and 2 OMD's, duh!

I challenge any poster on here to argue these facts. Many have proven to show no knowledge about optometric economics and its affairs, but I give you yet another chance.

For the pre-optometry students doubting these issues, you will regret it. It is very true and most informed doctors can attest to it, but do not digest the information that Optometry schools feed you, as they just want your money. For the few doctors who refuse to come in reality with said issues, I say to you, man up ask not what the profession can do for you, but what you can do for the profession.

Oh socal, who is be teh mostest wisest on theze boreds??

 

[thecgrblue]

Do you realize that nobody is ever going to take you seriously on this board anymore?

 

[Optogal]

The lack of benefits is true, but the 70-80K is what the amount they pay taxes on. I presume the average GROSS is far in excess of that, but after all expenses and write-offs, the only pay taxes on 70-80K.

Everyone who is a small business owner will be generous in their tax deductions, so view the 70-80K with a grain of salt.

No one seemed to notice my reply here. But I'd say more than any other reply in this thread, this answers the OP's question.

ODs who pay taxes on 70-80K are grossing more than that amount.

 

[JAZZEYE]

Why do threads always evolve into and OMD vs. OD debate?

We get it. OMD's are far superior to Optometrists because they are capable of performing surgery among other things.

But, that should not change the fact that there are several issues in Optometry which go unaddressed by some of the most wisest posters on these boards.

If one cares to examine a career in Optometry, one only need look at the issues:

a)Corporate optometry, also know as Walmart and Sams club, which will taint your image in the eyes of the public, from a well-respected doctor, to just a glorified technician who does eye exams next to the recycle department.

b)Managed Care, which will, logically, lower your reimbursements. In fact, Managed Care is probably the larges issue of them all, as most doctors are fooled into believing that managed care works for them. In basic terms, managed care reimburses the doctor a set fee for a set procedure - only the fee amount will quickly diminish.

c)Oversupply. Whats better than having an office amidst 5 OD's and 2 OMD's? Well, having an office amidst 4 OD's and 2 OMD's, duh!

I challenge any poster on here to argue these facts. Many have proven to show no knowledge about optometric economics and its affairs, but I give you yet another chance.

For the pre-optometry students doubting these issues, you will regret it. It is very true and most informed doctors can attest to it, but do not digest the information that Optometry schools feed you, as they just want your money. For the few doctors who refuse to come in reality with said issues, I say to you, man up ask not what the profession can do for you, but what you can do for the profession.

Daaag !!
Didn't you just get into Optometry school last year ?
If I'm correct it didn't take you long to get so sour 😳
Best give yourself a break.. your od-ing on SDN..it is only a snapshot.

Optometry is not a bad profession..it does have many challenges,
of course schools are obviously out to make money..but nobody implied to me just come and you'll be set.
How many people are out there with a 4yr $100,000 degree from XYZ University working as bartenders, waitress, receptionist..325,000 !!!
not that there is anything wrong with those professions..but they certainly don't require a college degree.

Most importantly..you should enjoy the work!
If your into making better than just a good living (subjective) ..you'll have to be strong on the business side.
Optometry is not so easily defined as a profession..it takes many forms.
Some may feel thats a good thing !
Its like everything..could be better..could be worse..I'm so wise

 

[cjensen20]

how come no one ever makes a thread about positives about optometry....there are only naysayers on here

 

[mclem222]

I have been out for two years and work at a corporate chain. The only thing I really dont like is that I constantly have to defend being an O.D. My brother is an M.D and so is my dad and I realize that they did more work in grad school than I did and had better grades in undergrad but I am still a doctor. I feel that most medical community people don't take our degree seriously..sort of view us as chiropractors of the eyes. I love my job itself though and the freedome it gives me. I have always thought if optometry became an M.D degree and a residency of med school it would have more respect. Like neurology and neurosurgery. Anyway..I digress..

 

[Veritas23]

I have been out for two years and work at a corporate chain. The only thing I really dont like is that I constantly have to defend being an O.D. My brother is an M.D and so is my dad and I realize that they did more work in grad school than I did and had better grades in undergrad but I am still a doctor. I feel that most medical community people don't take our degree seriously..sort of view us as chiropractors of the eyes. I love my job itself though and the freedome it gives me. I have always thought if optometry became an M.D degree and a residency of med school it would have more respect. Like neurology and neurosurgery. Anyway..I digress..

Not everyone can spell "freedome" like you can, Socal2014.

 

[ABaverage]

Did anyone mention a big negative in optometry is that you have to get REALLY close to the patient? Sometimes it is unpleasant smelling.