ODs doing surgery?

[noish]

I'm relatively new to this board, but as a future ophtho applicant this fall, the cavalier attitude of optometry worries me. Nowhere else in medicine have I seen more non-physicians practicing medicine. And nowhere else does one find non-physicians attempting to practice surgery!! Especially from folks who have gone to a three-year "trade school" after getting an AA from the local community college.

Many optometrists are now saying, "show us the research showing optometrists have worse surgical outcomes." We cannot take this bait! By allowing them to use this argument, we are allowing optometrists to get their foot in the door. In order to have a study showing worse surgical outcomes, one would need to have optometrists performing surgery. THIS IS NOT ETHICAL! Optometrists are hoping that by baiting the ophthalmologists in this manner, they will gain surgical privileges, if only to take part in a study. Once precedent has been set, there's no going back.

Just as a study comparing chiropracters performing spine surgery to orthopods is UNETHICAL, so is a study comparing optometrists to ophthalmologists performing surgery.

noish

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[maxwellfish]

trade school? community college? give me a break, don't pretend that you know the credentials of optometry students

 

[Andrew_Doan]

trade school? community college? give me a break, don't pretend that you know the credentials of optometry students

http://www.opted.org/info_profile2.cfm

only 3 out of 17 optometry schools require a B.A. This means some or most of the classes can be done at a community college.

At MCO, only 38% have B.A.'s.

At least I know all ophthalmologists have BA/BS, MD, and matched in a competitive residency.

 

[maxwellfish]

Good, you're picking one set of statistics and running with it. I can do that too. First, even the University of Chicago Med School doesn't require a degree... but it is preffered. Next, at NEWENCO, only 6 out of 104 do not have at least a BA/BS, thats less than 6% Finally, i don't have stats of course, but I have known med students from taking a class or two CC, all of a sudden OD students cannot do the same.

Generalizations are usually incorrect.... so "trade school" and "community college" being indicative of the whole OD education is a bit silly.

 

[exmike]

Good, you're picking one set of statistics and running with it. I can do that too. First, even the University of Chicago Med School doesn't require a degree... but it is preffered. Next, at NEWENCO, only 6 out of 104 do not have at least a BA/BS, thats less than 6% Finally, i don't have stats of course, but I have known med students from taking a class or two CC, all of a sudden OD students cannot do the same.

Generalizations are usually incorrect.... so "trade school" and "community college" being indicative of the whole OD education is a bit silly.

So calling OD education "trade school" would be as crazy as saying hmm... that OD education is equivalent to medical school and 4 years of residency?

 

[maxwellfish]

no they are not equivalent... but optometry students are not spending 4 years asking which is better 1 or 2.

 

[MPS]

I think this whole discussion is evidence of tribalism at its worst.

There is no question that optometrists receive a rigorous education. In some respects, optometrists receive a better education than ophthalmologists - for example in the areas of optics and visual science. It is crass to suggest that a place such as Berkeley's Department of Optometry is simply a "trade school". It has been a powerhouse of vision research for decades.

This debate centres on whether or not it is appropriate for optometrists to perform surgery. The argument against is a convincing one to anyone who has experience of managing complex medical and ophthalmic problems. I'm sure that everyone on both sides of the camp can agree that there are a set of pre-requisites that are required before one can perform eye surgery - the question is this: what should these pre-requisites be? I would argue 1. A medical degree, 2. Post-graduate training in general medicine/surgery, 3. Post-graduate training in ophthalmology. The path to becoming an ophthalmic surgeon is clearly defined and closely regulated - if optometrists wish to perform surgery, they know what they need to do.

 

[GeddyLee]

Well...I've never been so miffed in my life.

I don't care if OD's somehow go to Africa and start operating on eyes, starting from scratch and prove that their complication rate is less than that of the OMD's....first of all...I wouldn't believe it. These guys are so bent on increasing the scope of practice, what wouldn't they stop at. Furthermore, I just don't see how it could be.

And even if it were true....there is still a protocol to things, no matter how stupid. The FAA requires pilots to have 1200 hours of flight experience before being an airline captain. Why??? Because that's the way it is, and the way it always will be. Can a pilot with 300 hours do the same job just as well? Probably so. Can someone fly a fighter jet wearing contact lenses....probably, but the military won't allow it. Can I drive an 18 wheeler down I-40 a couple times a week and make 50K? Sure. But not without a commercial drivers license. See...there's something about standards. The optometrists want to make and enforce their own standards. What a bunch of boloney.

And as for the comments about OD schools not requiring a bachelor's degree....I'm in shock! So basically, in every other realm of life, to earn a doctoral degree, you need to first finish college, except OD? This seems familiar....wait...all that extra school is a waste of time, right? Just like the silly OMD's and their view on surgery.

I call for the immediate implementation of community college courses on how to perform CABG's and other major surgeries. After all, it doesn't take more than a weekend course on LASIK, it can't take more than a month of night classes to learn CABG.

 

[maxwellfish]

And as for the comments about OD schools not requiring a bachelor's degree....I'm in shock! So basically, in every other realm of life, to earn a doctoral degree, you need to first finish college, except OD? .

No, Optometry like many med schools may grant admission to some students with out a BA/BS... but it is preferred they have a degree.

 

[cbc]

GeddyLee made some reasonable points that I agree with. Evidence based medicine will probably show that one driver from a foreign country who drive in the US without a driver's license can drive as well as a American citizen with a license. However, it is by law the foreigner take an irrelevant eccentric written driving test to drive. Wouldn't it be more economical for foreigners to rent their own cars instead of ordering taxi's everywhere they went? Doesn't matter. And is there a statistically difference whether one drives better at age 16 than age 15? No way! But if you want to drive, be over 15, pass the test, and get your license. Same way, surgery is defined by medical school + residency + usmle 1,2,3. You want to do surgery, get your license.

I have some questions. Not all medical schools require a bachelors, am I correct (especially the combined BA/MD programs)? The same can be said about dental school, correct? Finally, as far as I know, most pharmacy schools also do not require a bachelor's degree. I am only trying to gain some knowledge here.

 

[maxwellfish]

I have some questions. Not all medical schools require a bachelors, am I correct (especially the combined BA/MD programs)? The same can be said about dental school, correct? Finally, as far as I know, most pharmacy schools also do not require a bachelor's degree. I am only trying to gain some knowledge here.

Yep that is what I am trying to get at.

 

[Andrew_Doan]

evans267 should provide us with some insight about optometry and ophthalmology. I believe she is doing both!

This was from about one year ago:

sorry to join this late, i only found this website a couple of days ago.

being an optometrist who went to med school, i think i can speak with some knowledge about both. i think optometry is a wonderful profession; one gets to be a primary care physician in a sense, people are generally happy with what you do for them, the eye is fascinating, it isn't too strenuous. i have been very happy practicing as an optometrist. if these are the things you want, then i think it is a great field to go into. i think the job market can be somewhat limiting - in the big cities especially. commercial jobs abound, but then your practice is limited to fitting glasses and contact lenses. most commercial doctors don't participate in the management of ocular disease. they are perfectly happy with this.

there are also jobs in the va hospitals, or working with ophthalmologists. these are harder to come by. however, i do think optometrists in these settings get to practice to the full scope that their training allows. they get to participate in pre and post op care as well as disease management. i agree with ophtho mudphud's statement that the most successfull ophthalmology practices have utilized optometrists. personally, i find that type of practice situation much more gratifying, and had i not gone to med school i would have certainly gone that route.

i left optometry for medicine because i wanted more. i wanted to learn more and i wanted to help patients to the best of my abilities, not being limited by the scope of my practice. i have chosen ophthamology, because i do love what i do, and i want to be able to expand upon that.

neither career is a bad decision, it just depends on what you want, and what you will be satisfied with.

 

[cbc]

Wait, no one has answered my question.

Technically, with combined BA/MD degrees, you are granted BOTH BA and MD correct? Is there anyone who can obtain a MD or DMD or DDS without having a Bachelors? Where are these schools located that allow this?

 

[Andrew_Doan]

Wait, no one has answered my question.

Technically, with combined BA/MD degrees, you are granted BOTH BA and MD correct? Is there anyone who can obtain a MD or DMD or DDS without having a Bachelors? Where are these schools located that allow this?

99.99% of the students starting medical school have a BA/BS before starting medical school. The combined BA/MD grants both the BA/MD.

Rosalind Frankilin University of Medicine (Chicago- formerly known as Finch) doesn't technically require the BA/BS. One thing to remember is that some students complete a BA/BS in three years. Chicago states this:
http://www.finchcms.edu/cms/admapp.cfm#admreq


Admission Requirements

* Applicants are selected competitively on the basis of scholarship, motivation, character, personality and achievements.

* At least three years of course work from an accredited college is required which includes one academic year in biology, inorganic chemistry, organic chemistry, and physics. Most successful applicants hold a baccalaureate degree and are in the upper third of their graduating class.

* Applicants meeting at least minimal requirements are invited for a personal interview, which is a necessary component of the application process.

One out of 126 schools is a huge difference compared to the 14/17 optometry schools that do not require the BA/BS. I don't understand why optometry schools do not make this a standard if they are granting a Doctorate degree.

Additionally, even with this allowance, 99.99% of medical students will have obtained the BA/BS degrees. Of this pool, only the best medical students become ophthalmologists. I think most people do not realize how difficult it is for physicians to be granted the privilege to train in a specialty, such as ENT, derm, or ophthalmology. FYI, the average board scores for ophthalmology residents last year was 228. This score indicates that the applicants are in the top third of their class in regards to the national boards. In addition to achieving a high board score, look at some of their CV's: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=100344

 

[maxwellfish]

Dr. Doan and others.

yes optometry school and medical school are different. Searching for stats to discount optometry to this level is also very childish, and any one of you docs out there should know that many more than just one medschool accepts students with less than a BS/BA.

I will mention once again that you are blowing single, almost out of context stats, out of proportion.

Frist in defense of MCO... just like med school optometry schools offer 3+4 programs with contract schools. I have no idea, but maybe this school holds more than others being such a small class size.

Next, just like med school (I said this before) optometry schools accept students with out a BS/BA some of the time. let me quote two med schools to show it is more than Dr. Doan's "one"

~Pritzker~

"Applicants must have completed 90 credit hours (using the AMCAS methodology) prior to matriculation from an accredited four-year degree-granting college or university. A baccalaureate degree is not required but is strongly preferred by the Admissions Committee."

~Dartmouth~

"Also required is the equivalent of at least three years' college work at an American or Canadian college or university. Along with completing the above premedical course requirements, students are encouraged to major in a field of particular interest and, if possible, to pursue independent investigations in that field."

Just two schools I picked, so its very obvious that many more than one out of 126 will accept students with out a BS/BA.

To make you feel better--YES medshool is more competative because of the number of kids wanting to be medical doctors, so YES medschools will accept less students without a degree, then the not-as-competative optometry school.

I'm not going to keep searching for stats-its boring
Sorry it was long, I'm just tired of listening to the discount of optometry. Done

 

[Goober]

Dr. Doan and others.





Next, just like med school (I said this before) optometry schools accept students with out a BS/BA some of the time. let me quote two med schools to show it is more than Dr. Doan's "one"

~Pritzker~

"Applicants must have completed 90 credit hours (using the AMCAS methodology) prior to matriculation from an accredited four-year degree-granting college or university. A baccalaureate degree is not required but is strongly preferred by the Admissions Committee."

~Dartmouth~

"Also required is the equivalent of at least three years' college work at an American or Canadian college or university. Along with completing the above premedical course requirements, students are encouraged to major in a field of particular interest and, if possible, to pursue independent investigations in that field."

Just two schools I picked, so its very obvious that many more than one out of 126 will accept students with out a BS/BA.

To make you feel better--YES medshool is more competative because of the number of kids wanting to be medical doctors, so YES medschools will accept less students without a degree, then the not-as-competative optometry school.

This is a pretty meaningless statement. Yes it is possible to gain admissions to medical schools without a bachelors, but in reality it is very unusual to be granted admission without one. In my class 100% had bachelors and about 20% had advanced degrees PhD,MS, MPH ect

 

[cbc]

Sorry, I didnt mean to sway everyone into this type of discussion. I was just asking a question.

The point is, no matter how high your GPA, PSATs, SATs, IQ, MCAT, OAT, USMLE 1/2/3, how many research publications you have, blah blah blah if you dont have a driver's license you cannot drive, if you dont have a teacher's credential you cannot teach at schools http://www.ctc.ca.gov/profserv/examinfo/examinfo.html, and if you dont have formal surgical training/licensure you cannot do surgery. If one wants to have these privileges, pass the necessary exams and get your licensure for it.

 

[maxwellfish]

And I am not taking any stance regarding surgery. I am merely defending optometry and the OD degree. I take offense to any doctoral level degree being reduced to trade school and the like.

Oh, being a bonehead is not the greatest either (geddylee)

just more of my two pennies. OUT

 

[GeddyLee]

tee-hee-hee

Of course I didn't mean to call all optometrists boneheads....just the ones marching on Washington, DC. At least I think we can all agree that in the current role, optometrists are extremely valuable to primary eye care.

 

[maxwellfish]

didn't mean to point fingers (just naming names)

 

[cbc]

GeddyLee, is that supposed to be Kenny G?

 

[noish]

Let's get real folks. When optometrists are quoting Dartmouth Med School as an example of not having to have a bachelors, they're grasping at thin air. I can tell you, there aren't ANY (repeat ANY) ivy league grads that I know (yeah, your Uncle Bobby's friend Joseph was an optometrist who went to UPenn) who go into optometry. DMS doesn't accept ANYONE without a bachelors, a GPA over 3.7 from an excellent college, and MCATs above 90th percentile. Maybe add a PhD to that.

In my book, an optometry degree is right up there next to a chiropractic degree. Both useful in their own scopes of practice but there is absolutely no equivance to an MD. So the fact that they want to do surgery would make me laugh if it wasn't such an imminent problem. I can't believe we're having this discussion.

 

[shredhog65]

so i was reading a recent issue of ophthalmic surgery (i think that's the name of the magazine- excuse me if i'm wrong, i'm still a trans year and i'm not reading journals that much)

there are a few articles in there about the whole OD for surgery thing.

i take back everything i said in my earlier post. i obviously did not know the entire situation.

OD's are asking for too much. they need to stop. it is in the best interest for their (our - were supposed to work together right?) patients. OD's. most of you are probably cool, but some of your collegues want to become back door ophthalmologists. that's just wrong.

there is no way to for an OD'd to get even close to the same amount of training that an ophthalmologist gets during residency. i don't believe for a second that OD's can learn enough medical and surgical skills without completing medical school and residency program. like i just said, the only thing this will hurt is the patient.

i have a lot of respect for OD's who do what they're trained to do. but some are trying to overstep their training and open a loophole in the system at the expense of their patients health.

this is ethicly and morally wrong.

 

[GeddyLee]

GeddyLee, is that supposed to be Kenny G?

No, that's definitely not kenny g. that's Geddy Lee...maybe I should change my avatar...hmmmm..

 

[thenderson]

noish-

remind me to not buy your book....please do not compare optometrists to chiros. .....chiros practice alternative medicine and have no standards governing the entrance to their schools or the exit..ODs must take the OAT to enter and then complete 3 parts of National Boards and then state boards to be able to practice.. please do a little research before you attempt to bash a well-respected profession....i for one do not think ODs should be allowed to do surgery without the proper training....i do however think some sort of program could be created which would allow aspiring ODs who wish to do surgery the option of completing a residency, much like dental students who wish to do OMS...just a thought

 

[cbc]

I think the OMS pathway is a backdoor piece of crap. I honestly cannot believe that was ever created. OMS, not the most competitive dental specialty and requiring the same timespan in training as general surgery, somehow squeezes by to grant two doctorates (MD and DDS or DMD). Neurosurgery and cardiothoracic surgery require more time, are highly competitive, demand a more rigorous lifestyle (compare prevalence of acute oral trauma vs acute MI), and still grant only MD. Someone should really explain to me why they give so much freebies in the field of dentistry.

This convinced me. Dr Doan is right. We MDs need to start fighting for freebies that people in other fields have won or are fighting for.

noish-

remind me to not buy your book....please do not compare optometrists to chiros. .....chiros practice alternative medicine and have no standards governing the entrance to their schools or the exit..ODs must take the OAT to enter and then complete 3 parts of National Boards and then state boards to be able to practice.. please do a little research before you attempt to bash a well-respected profession....i for one do not think ODs should be allowed to do surgery without the proper training....i do however think some sort of program could be created which would allow aspiring ODs who wish to do surgery the option of completing a residency, much like dental students who wish to do OMS...just a thought

 

[MPS]

Here in Europe you need both a medical degree and a dental degree to practice maxillofacial surgery and oral medicine - both must be gained the old-fashioned way.

I think the OMS pathway is a backdoor piece of crap. I honestly cannot believe that was ever created. OMS, not the most competitive dental specialty and requiring the same timespan in training as general surgery, somehow squeezes by to grant two doctorates (MD and DDS or DMD). Neurosurgery and cardiothoracic surgery require more time, are highly competitive, demand a more rigorous lifestyle (compare prevalence of acute oral trauma vs acute MI), and still grant only MD. Someone should really explain to me why they give so much freebies in the field of dentistry.

This convinced me. Dr Doan is right. We MDs need to start fighting for freebies that people in other fields have won or are fighting for.

 

[Andrew_Doan]

please do not compare optometrists to chiros. .....chiros practice alternative medicine and have no standards governing the entrance to their schools or the exit..ODs must take the OAT to enter and then complete 3 parts of National Boards and then state boards to be able to practice..

Don't glorify optometry too much at the expense of the chiropractic profession. "Chiros" have their own National Board of Examiners too:

http://www.nbce.org/

About the NBCE

The National Board of Chiropractic Examiners (NBCE) is the principal testing agency for the chiropractic profession. Established in 1963, the NBCE develops and administers standardized national examinations according to established guidelines. Among the benefits of the NBCE exams are:

-promoting high standards of competence
-assisting state licensing agencies in assessing competence
-facilitating the licensure of incoming practitioners and enhancing professional credibility.

Headquartered in Greeley, Colorado, the NBCE is a nonprofit organization overseen by 11 directors, five of whom are elected by their NBCE districts, four who serve as "at-large" representatives, and two who are appointed by the Federation of Chiropractic Licensing Boards. All are distinguished members of the worldwide chiropractic community.

In providing standardized written and performance assessments for the chiropractic profession, the NBCE develops, administers, analyzes, scores, and reports results from various examinations. The NBCE scores are among the criteria utilized by state licensing agencies to determine whether applicants satisfy state qualifications for licensure.

In its role as an international testing agency, the NBCE espouses no particular chiropractic philosophy, but formulates test plans according to information provided collectively by the chiropractic colleges, the state licensing agencies, field practitioners, subject specialists, and a Job Analysis of Chiropractic.

 

[BackTalk]

Thanks Dr. Doan. As a chiropractor I can tell you first hand that there are ?standards governing the entrance to their schools or the exit?. Read Dr. Doan?s post referencing the NBCE. They?re five sets of boards. The forth will allow you to get a state license and the fifth is actually elective (covers physical therapy which, depending on state, is required). They?re are not a cakewalk by any means and you must pass each part in order to sit for the next. Some states require their own state-licensing exam in addition to the national chiropractic boards. During Chiropractic College you must also pass two sets of comp boards. Without successfully mastering the material and passing these boards you can?t graduate. There is no entrance testing to enter chiropractic college, I do believe they are working on an entrance exam called a CCAT. In order to enter chiropractic school you must pass the same premed courses that you and medical students take. Chiropractic colleges are also starting to require a bachelor?s degree and a 3.0 GPA to enter. Maybe you should be the one doing the research.

OD?s are a very important part of the healthcare system. Surgery is a risky business and only the best of the best earn the right to practice it. I realize you want to expand your practice as we all do. Personally I would feel the most comfortable with having an ophthalmologist doing any eye surgery on me. They?re in a league of their own and their schooling is unmatched in this specialty.

This issue is similar to chiropractors wanting full prescription rights and practicing primary care. We unfortunately do not have the training to practice that way. You just can?t beat having a residency and it is something our profession lacks. Maybe perhaps optometrists can, with additional training, practice minor surgical procedures. That may be a better option. Similar to chiropractor asking for limited prescription rights to aid in the treatment of NMS conditions. What if chiropractors where allowed to do orthopedic surgery? Would you want them working on you? I wouldn?t it!

One thing to remember, if you have the political power and the money, it?s easy to buy what you want. Chiropractors have done it for years.

 

[Richard_Hom]

Dear Forum,

I had hoped that your forum would "invite" open discussion about this or other similar issues regarding optometry and ophthalmology and that it could lead to some thought creation on either side that could be educational.

In this regard, I would have also expected the posts to "invite" frank discussions from "all sides". I may have in the past been guilty of the same, as are my colleagues, and might not have not more graceful in discussed this issue. I suppose the "art" of debate or rhetoric is lost and we all must gravitate to a conversational level which I find actually polarizes rather encourages discussion.

I do believe that any discussion of the merits of any professional scope of practice should stand on each professions arguements without resorting to marginalizing any other profession. I think it is rather poor and unproductive to involve or leverage the status of other professions or discipline to advance anyone's points.

Regretfully,
Richard_Hom

 

[maxwellfish]

I'm sorry this has turned into a mudslinging contest.

In further defense of the optometry education, I read in the Review of Ophthalmology, that there was data that shows 89% of optometry school applicants hold a college degree. So I don't think ODs are sliding in there with out a BS/BA... and those that do get in with out one are most likely part of a 3+4 program and will infact be awarded BS/BA after their first year in optometry school... I think this is like some medschool programs, just less of a rarity. Anyway, I think its one of those HIGHLY preferred pre-reqs in most cases.

 

[aphistis]

I think the OMS pathway is a backdoor piece of crap. I honestly cannot believe that was ever created. OMS, not the most competitive dental specialty and requiring the same timespan in training as general surgery, somehow squeezes by to grant two doctorates (MD and DDS or DMD). Neurosurgery and cardiothoracic surgery require more time, are highly competitive, demand a more rigorous lifestyle (compare prevalence of acute oral trauma vs acute MI), and still grant only MD. Someone should really explain to me why they give so much freebies in the field of dentistry.

This convinced me. Dr Doan is right. We MDs need to start fighting for freebies that people in other fields have won or are fighting for.

I won't succumb to the temptation to jump in the mud, but I think your argument, in addition to being completely irrelevant to this thread, could have used a little more revision before posting. Posting angry tirades on topics with which one is clearly ill-acquainted doesn't generally help one's credibility.

 

[cbc]

Right...

2 people:
-1st student does 4 yrs of dental school, 6 years of surgical residency, gets BOTH MD and DDS.
-2nd student, does 4 yrs of medical school, 6 years of surgical residency, and only has an MD.

I think that this process is unfair to the 2nd student. It is not necessary to grant the dentist an MD at all, since many argue dentists and doctors are at the same level. You consider that ill-acquainted? It is relevant to the person who wanted optometry to have the same backdoor.

I won't succumb to the temptation to jump in the mud, but I think your argument, in addition to being completely irrelevant to this thread, could have used a little more revision before posting. Posting angry tirades on topics with which one is clearly ill-acquainted doesn't generally help one's credibility.

 

[aphistis]

Right...

2 people:
-1st student does 4 yrs of dental school, 6 years of surgical residency, gets BOTH MD and DDS.
-2nd student, does 4 yrs of medical school, 6 years of surgical residency, and only has an MD.

I think that this process is unfair to the 2nd student. It is not necessary to grant the dentist an MD at all, since many argue dentists and doctors are at the same level. You consider that ill-acquainted? It is relevant to the person who wanted optometry to have the same backdoor.

I do consider that ill-acquainted. You haven't demonstrated any familiarity with the actual content of OMFS training, only with the eventual outcome.

 

[medduck]

Right...

2 people:
-1st student does 4 yrs of dental school, 6 years of surgical residency, gets BOTH MD and DDS.
-2nd student, does 4 yrs of medical school, 6 years of surgical residency, and only has an MD.

I think that this process is unfair to the 2nd student. It is not necessary to grant the dentist an MD at all, since many argue dentists and doctors are at the same level. You consider that ill-acquainted? It is relevant to the person who wanted optometry to have the same backdoor.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of graduating in a med school class with 2 OMS docs. These guys entered our class in the 2nd year and completed half of the med school basic science curriculum, completed all the required clerkships during the 3rd year, and arguably had a more grueling 4th year than most med students- they spend 4 months as sub-interns on the OMS service averaging about 100 hours per week. One of them told me that most of their dental school colleagues think they're crazy for going through all that. They were both still on service through graduation- one actually got an emergency page about a mandibular fracture while at graduation. These guys truly earned their MDs.

As far as ODs training for surgery, like OMS docs, maybe they could go through the last 3 years of med school and compete for ophthalmology residencies with the rest of us. I doubt that too many would be game for that? Instead I presume that organized optometry wants to set up their own surgical training programs. I believe that this, not the OMS program, would be a backdoor to surgery. This is where the danger lies for patients if optometry continues its push for surgical privileges.

 

[cbc]

If you count those 2 yrs as medical school, their residency is 4 years long. Ask any ENT resident if their 6 year residency training is any less rigorous, especially before the 80hrs/wk implementation.

I'm sure dentists will feel the same if pharmacy and optometry school offered a program where the option of doing 2 years of dental clinics will grant them DDS/Pharm or DDS/OD plus a dental subspecialty. Any PhD, PharmD, OD has to start from scratch, first year, if they wanted to become a physician or dentist. Any physician has to start from scratch, first year, if they want to become a dentist. ONLY dentists have such a privilege to jump fields and obtain 2 degrees in the same timespan of training.

Aphistis, say what you like. I don't have to demonstrate anything to you, and you haven't demonstrated to me anything either but I won't start criticizing you.

Yesterday, I had the privilege of graduating in a med school class with 2 OMS docs. These guys entered our class in the 2nd year and completed half of the med school basic science curriculum, completed all the required clerkships during the 3rd year, and arguably had a more grueling 4th year than most med students- they spend 4 months as sub-interns on the OMS service averaging about 100 hours per week. One of them told me that most of their dental school colleagues think they're crazy for going through all that. They were both still on service through graduation- one actually got an emergency page about a mandibular fracture while at graduation. These guys truly earned their MDs.

As far as ODs training for surgery, like OMS docs, maybe they could go through the last 3 years of med school and compete for ophthalmology residencies with the rest of us. I doubt that too many would be game for that? Instead I presume that organized optometry wants to set up their own surgical training programs. I believe that this, not the OMS program, would be a backdoor to surgery. This is where the danger lies for patients if optometry continues its push for surgical privileges.

 

[aphistis]

If they have to also complete the first 2 yrs basic science, that makes things more fair. I'm sure dentists will feel the same if pharmacy and optometry school offered a program where the option of doing 2 years of dental clinics will grant them DDS/Pharm or DDS/OD plus a dental subspecialty.

Aphistis, say what you like. I don't have to demonstrate anything to you, and you haven't demonstrated to me anything either but I won't start criticizing you.

The thing is, I don't have anything I *need* to support. I'm the one agreeing with the status quo (the one that, incidentally, both organized medicine & dentistry are OK with), while you're taking the position that dual degree OMS have no legitimate entitlement to their MD. To quote a dead Greek authority on the matter, "he who posits must defend."

 

[cbc]

Just because something is in status quo does not make it correct, fair, or ethical. Slavery was accepted for hundreds of years, not by everyone but by society as a whole. I can fight, or I can remain still while holding my opinion. I am not an ENT, so I feel no desire or need to fight. I only wished to state my opinions. My opinion is against slavery, but I do not have to dedicate my life to fight and defend my stance.

The thing is, I don't have anything I *need* to support. I'm the one agreeing with the status quo (the one that, incidentally, both organized medicine & dentistry are OK with), while you're taking the position that dual degree OMS have no legitimate entitlement to their MD. To quote a dead Greek authority on the matter, "he who posits must defend."

 

[aphistis]

Just because something is in status quo does not make it correct, fair, or ethical. Slavery was accepted for hundreds of years, not by everyone but by society as a whole. I can fight, or I can remain still while holding my opinion. I am not an ENT, so I feel no desire or need to fight. I only wished to state my opinions. My opinion is against slavery, but I do not have to dedicate my life to fight and defend my stance.

Right, and abolitionists made persuasive arguments about the merits of eliminating slavery, and society eventually embraced the new standard. You haven't cleared that bar; heck, you haven't even left the ground yet.

(Incidentally, that same dead Greek authority also said you can't argue by analogy. )

 

[cbc]

Um...more like status-quo pro-slavery advocates could not defend their stance. At least that's what the Confederates appeared to be doing with their guns during the Civil War. The current status quo is Iraq War which was supported by House and Senate, and we see Bush defending his decision every day on the news. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the dead Greek authority you quoted.

However, I do not want to leave the ground to start that same Civil War (or the like) against dentists. Like I said, anyone who jumps into another health profession has to start from first year scratch. I at least recognize dentistry is the only profession with such a privilege to go backdoor into medicine, and I have the right to my opinion without fighting society in defense of it.

 

[aphistis]

Um...more like status-quo pro-slavery advocates could not defend their stance. At least that's what the Confederates appeared to be doing with their guns during the Civil War. The current status quo is Iraq War which was supported by House and Senate, and we see Bush defending his decision every day on the news. Therefore, I respectfully disagree with the dead Greek authority you quoted.

However, I do not want to leave the ground to start that same Civil War (or the like) against dentists. Like I said, anyone who jumps into another health profession has to start from first year scratch. I at least recognize dentistry is the only profession with such a privilege to go backdoor into medicine, and I have the right to my opinion without fighting society in defense of it.

Fair enough. Have a nice day.

 

[cbc]

Same to you.

Sorry for that seemingly useless argument. My main point is, IMHO, no more backdoors should be opened, and my full support goes against any more health professions that attempt to open one.

Fair enough. Have a nice day.

 

[theoptometrist]

an optometrist to do anything? Shouldn't an ophthalmologist be the only one that knows what an eye looks like and how it should behave and how it works with the body?

How on earth can an opthalmologist believe an optometrist can have the right to put and allow a person to wear a piece of plastic in their eye! Incredible.

But what happened when an optometrist put a contact lens in an eye?

What happened when I fired a YAG just microns past the capsule? I've seen so many bad YAGs it isn't funny.

But, wait....an ophthalmologist is "trained" to line up a light beam.

People shouldn't do dangerous things around the eye because only an ophthalmologist can handle the situation. Isn't that right? Don't let your trademark be infringed on because you're so perfect! Opthalmologists rule! Not. Sorry you had to go to school for that but you know what I'm talking about. Protect your real skills...not something you know you do with your eyes closed.

Jamie

 

[JR]

This is an "excellent" post! Just great. It is childish remarks like these that make me realize once again that ophthalmologists need to fight to protect our patients' outcomes.

" Protect your real skills...not something you know you do with your eyes closed." ---> What? Are you out of your mind?! If you think you can do a YAG with your eyes closed, you need your optometry license taken away instead of granting you surgical privileges.

Jaime, I sincerely hope that you don't blind anyone with your "eyes closed" technique. And, going back to the old question: if all this is so easy for you, why didn't you attend medical school to begin with, so that you could "laser away" all day long? (but please don't give me that "I just wanted primary care for the eye" excuse).

 

[maxwellfish]

This is an "excellent" post! Just great. It is childish remarks like these that make me realize once again that ophthalmologists need to fight to protect our patients' outcomes.

" Protect your real skills...not something you know you do with your eyes closed." ---> What? Are you out of your mind?! If you think you can do a YAG with your eyes closed, you need your optometry license taken away instead of granting you surgical privileges.

Jaime, I sincerely hope that you don't blind anyone with your "eyes closed" technique. And, going back to the old question: if all this is so easy for you, why didn't you attend medical school to begin with, so that you could "laser away" all day long? (but please don't give me that "I just wanted primary care for the eye" excuse).

hmm..What is the "I just wanted primary care for the eye" excuse? I'm confused, I haven't heard that one.

Please enlighten me.

 

[mdkurt]

People shouldn't do dangerous things around the eye because only an ophthalmologist can handle the situation.
Jamie

I hope I'm not quoting you out of context. Sounds like you hit the nail right on the head.

 

[shredhog65]

so i was taking to a retinal surgeon today and his opinion on the whole ODs trying to get more privilages was basically this -

it is definetly in the worst interest of the patient, and best interest of the OD to make more money and glorify themselves. however, if it does happen on a larger scale, then he think his practice will explode due to the huge increase in complications. maybe retina is the way to go - there will be a much higher demand for retinal surgeons if ODs get more privilages.

 

[JennyW]

so i was taking to a retinal surgeon today and his opinion on the whole ODs trying to get more privilages was basically this -

it is definetly in the worst interest of the patient, and best interest of the OD to make more money and glorify themselves. however, if it does happen on a larger scale, then he think his practice will explode due to the huge increase in complications. maybe retina is the way to go - there will be a much higher demand for retinal surgeons if ODs get more privilages.

Yes.

I am sure that all those wild and crazy ODs excising chalazions or *gasp* injecting them with triamcinolone will creat a BOOMING business for retinal specialists.

Jen

 

[JZ2020]

Jen -

Your point is well taken. However, I refer you to one of Dr. Doan's earlier posts on this thread which clarifies this point:

In OK, ODs have clearly stated that their future intentions are to perform non-laser surgery. In regards to the recent OK optometry bill, don't even for a second think that this was a legit bill! It was snuck in at the last minute and attached to a Pharmacy bill!

BTW, Oklahoma ODs told Cynthia Bradford, MD that their goal is to replace the comphrensive ophthalmologist. This means cataract, plastics, glaucoma, and all lasers.

 

[shredhog65]

Yes.

I am sure that all those wild and crazy ODs excising chalazions or *gasp* injecting them with triamcinolone will creat a BOOMING business for retinal specialists.

Jen

i am just repeating what they said - like it or not, they are right. i wouldn't go to an OD for anything even slightly invasive or for pharmacologic therapy. neither would anyone if they understood OD's are not medical doctors. unfortunately many OD's (not all) do not make it clear (and in some circumstaces make it very unclear) that they are not ophthalmologists, and that there is a big difference between the two. i would bet the house that if patients were clearly explained this they would choose an ophthalmologist over an OD for everything not involving refraction - every time. that includes "gasp" chalazions.