Optometrists no longer welcome at the AAO meetings

[r_salis]

http://www.aao.org/aao/news/release/20040429c.cfm

April 29, 2004


SAN FRANCISCO The Board of Trustees of the American Academy of Ophthalmology, acting on the direction of its Council, has raised the standard for participation in all Academy educational activities at its Annual Meeting. The standards, consistent with the education and training of ophthalmologists (Eye M.D.s) will preclude participation by optometrists.

Academy educational programs are developed for ophthalmologists who possess the educational foundation of medical school, internship, and residency. Without this base of knowledge and experience, the information cannot be fully optimized for its intended patient benefit. This change in standards is consistent with the Academy mission to advance the lifelong learning and professional interests of ophthalmologists to ensure that the public can obtain the best possible eye care.

Unfortunately, optometrists have attended Academy courses in the past and used their participation as justification to perform procedures that are beyond their education, training or experience. Such a misrepresentation of qualifications runs counter to the accountability the American public and its watchdogs demand and deserve.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[aphistis]

Totally unrelated, but I just noticed the quote in your sig. I love Cake.

 

[Tony.]

Any OD's out there (or OD students) care to say whats on their mind about with regards to this article?

 

[Tony.]

English English!! ugh i cant type today sorry!

just, any OD's or students: tell us how you feel about the above news article.

 

[Eyegirl2k7]

I'll only say one thing...consider the source.


Eyegirl

 

[r_salis]

Banning optometrists from the OMD meetings is a pretty childish reaction to being concerned over optometry's progressive infringement into OMD territory, in my opinion. I understand their concern (and am not a fan of optometry moving into surgical procedures), but there are more mature ways to deal with it.

(aphistis -- yay, another Cake fan! )

 

[edinOH]

I'm not an ophthalmologist and I'm not anti-OD. In fact, my father is an OD and I am very familiar with the field. But just to play devil's advocate...

One of the reasons they are doing this is politics of course. But politics is a two-way street. I think some in Optometry have used the courses they have taken at the AAO meetings as justification and "training" for some of the advanced procedures and prescribing priviledges that some are trying to get into. At best their position is that these courses aren't meant to serve as training to perform specific procedures or write for specific drugs but rather educational review and in some cases introduction. At worst, it is just an attempt to protect their turf. The reality is it is a combination of both.

Your argument against the opticians refracting is valid. They aren't properly trained to evaluate the whole health of the eye or the specific and often subtle signs of systemic disease that the eye can provide. Optometrists are.

Along the same lines though, Optometrists aren't properly trained to prescribe systemic medications or to perform surgery. The surgery may be a technical issue but it is the complications both local and systemic that can get you in trouble.

I for one don't see what Optometrists really have to gain by expanding their practice rights. In some instances you may make more money but you are also inviting in a whole new set of insurance and regulatory headaches. (My father feels the same way...he is in Oklahoma as a matter of fact.)

I've always thought Optometrists could do a better job of marketing frames, lenses and eye care products (some do of course). I realize it probably doesn't hold up to well to your academic ideals you are learning or have learned in Optometry school, but it does help increase the bottom line. And the bottom line is ultimately why most of us get up in the morning.

Just my 0.02. Take it as you wish.

 

[Tony.]

I'm not an ophthalmologist and I'm not anti-OD. In fact, my father is an OD and I am very familiar with the field. But just to play devil's advocate...

One of the reasons they are doing this is politics of course. But politics is a two-way street. I think some in Optometry have used the courses they have taken at the AAO meetings as justification and "training" for some of the advanced procedures and prescribing priviledges that some are trying to get into. At best their position is that these courses aren't meant to serve as training to perform specific procedures or write for specific drugs but rather educational review and in some cases introduction. At worst, it is just an attempt to protect their turf. The reality is it is a combination of both.

Your argument against the opticians refracting is valid. They aren't properly trained to evaluate the whole health of the eye or the specific and often subtle signs of systemic disease that the eye can provide. Optometrists are.

Along the same lines though, Optometrists aren't properly trained to prescribe systemic medications or to perform surgery. The surgery may be a technical issue but it is the complications both local and systemic that can get you in trouble.

I for one don't see what Optometrists really have to gain by expanding their practice rights. In some instances you may make more money but you are also inviting in a whole new set of insurance and regulatory headaches. (My father feels the same way...he is in Oklahoma as a matter of fact.)

I've always thought Optometrists could do a better job of marketing frames, lenses and eye care products (some do of course). I realize it probably doesn't hold up to well to your academic ideals you are learning or have learned in Optometry school, but it does help increase the bottom line. And the bottom line is ultimately why most of us get up in the morning.

Just my 0.02. Take it as you wish.

uh, sorry, i dont know why i quoted you saying everything you said....
but!
my question is: do you think that with proper training, the scope of optometry
could be widened a bit?

 

[sammyiu]

Along the same lines though, Optometrists aren't properly trained to prescribe systemic medications or to perform surgery. The surgery may be a technical issue but it is the complications both local and systemic that can get you in trouble.

I agree with most of what you said although it depends on what you consider surgery. In the recents attempts by the AAO to have rights revoked from ODs who practice in VA hospitals they consider simple procedures such as eyelash epilation and puntal plugs surgery. These are things that OD's are well trained to do. As far as systemic medications go, we are trained to precribe them. We are prepared with multiple physiology, pharmacology and therapeutics classes and are already recognized as competent in this area by many states.

 

[Andrew_Doan]

I agree with most of what you said although it depends on what you consider surgery. In the recents attempts by the AAO to have rights revoked from ODs who practice in VA hospitals they consider simple procedures such as eyelash epilation and puntal plugs surgery. These are things that OD's are well trained to do. As far as systemic medications go, we are trained to precribe them. We are prepared with multiple physiology, pharmacology and therapeutics classes and are already recognized as competent in this area by many states.

The VA Bill does not include eyelash epilation and punctal plugs as "surgery". With some rewording, this will be made clear. The VA bill is really in response to Oklahoma optometrists who are performing laser surgery (PRP, focal retina lasers, yag cap, ALT, etc...) and non-laser surgery in the VA system (lid surgeries). Yes, there are ODs who are illegally doing PRP lasers in the VA system.

In regards to systemic medications, a course in pharmacology doesn't provide an individual enough background to prescribe systemic medications. Medical doctors go through more than pharmacology courses to learn how to prescribe. Some even go through 7 years of residency and fellowship (cardiology) to learn how to prescribe medications. As an ophthalmologist, I know enough to stay away from serious systemic medications (e.g. insulin) and defer management to the patient's primary care physician.

A cavalier attitude about systemic medications could harm or kill patients. Prednisone and immunosuppressives often used in ophthalmic medicine are deadly.

 

[Reality check]

I agree with Ophthalmology banning optometrists from attending there meeting. Optometrists are not well trained in prescribing systemic medications properly. My opinion ofcourse and there are those who will disagree with me. There are recent OD's out there that are not competent in prescribing topical meds for diagnosis and treatment of eye disease let alone systemic.
Do recent optometry school students get exposure in prescribing systemic medication in a hospital setting? I don't think so. The OMD's arguments are valid. The optometric profession is becoming a disgraceful profession and one day it will only hurt itself for what they are continuing of doing.
Think about it. Why would OD's want to do surgery? They have no business in OMD territory. I applaud the OMD's fight against optometry.
Seriously, it's not fair to them!

 

[leviz]

Part of the reason I decided to go the route of Optometry is because I don't want to do surgeries, perscribe a lot of medication, etc. and have all the headaches and added stress that come along with it. Therefore the AAO decision does not really bother me. I'll do the job I was trained to do because that's what I wanted. As for mr. realitycheck... If you didn't show so much obvious hostility and anger people might actually take your posts seriously... talk about wasting your time.