Physician vs Optometrist

[pennybridge]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Oh wow that's the last time I read a thread title and blindly post.

lol it was good though.

 

[Anastasis]

Yes, PAs are under the supervision of a MD.

You're correct, but ask yourself -- even if it were possible -- would you really want to be the MD that works at Wal-Mart? 😉

Seriously, that could happen (no reason it couldn't), but I pity the guy with that job...

I heard the clinics would be staffed by NPs not PAs... PAs too? Well that makes a problem for Walmart in that then they MUST hire an MD/DO. Can't NPs practice w/o an MD/DO?



My dad is currently practicing in an optical doing basically what a optometrist does (he's an MD). He loves it because he's ceased to treat anything even remotely medical (transfers it all out) but he can still see patients and fit contacts. Almost no malpractice and he works very few hours. Great retirement job for him (keeps him from going house-crazy).

I seem to remember him telling me something about TX law that apparently Optometrists can't practice *inside* an optical in TX. They usually just get around that by setting up practice right next door. Anyone know more about that law than I do?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

i hear they used to have an analogy section on the mcat.... shame they got rid of it....

yeah now *******es like me can score above a 30 and don't have resort to optometry, the radiologic technologists and of the eye medicine world. the future of medicine is surely bleak.

 

[pennybridge]

yeah now *******es like me can score above a 30 and don't have resort to optometry, the radiologic technologists and of the eye medicine world. the future of medicine is surely bleak.

are you saying that all optometrists are students who couldn't score above a 30 on the MCAT?

that's not very compassionate of you, belittling other peoples' professions like that. Good luck on the doctoring, though!

 

[QuantumMechanic]

are you saying that all optometrists are students who couldn't score above a 30 on the MCAT?

that's not very compassionate of you, belittling other peoples' professions like that. Good luck on the doctoring, though!

 

[bretticus]

I heard the clinics would be staffed by NPs not PAs... PAs too? Well that makes a problem for Walmart in that then they MUST hire an MD/DO. Can't NPs practice w/o an MD/DO?



My dad is currently practicing in an optical doing basically what a optometrist does (he's an MD). He loves it because he's ceased to treat anything even remotely medical (transfers it all out) but he can still see patients and fit contacts. Almost no malpractice and he works very few hours. Great retirement job for him (keeps him from going house-crazy).

I seem to remember him telling me something about TX law that apparently Optometrists can't practice *inside* an optical in TX. They usually just get around that by setting up practice right next door. Anyone know more about that law than I do?

I was just responding to the other poster -- I have no idea what Wal-Mart is doing. Someone else did say they were using NPs though, and I find that more plausible for reasons you mention. NPs can practice without supervision as far as I know.

 

[soccerfan]

Don't be so sure about the salary part. I know many physicians who work long and hard. Their hours can be so much longer than an O.D. and the salary can be a lot less. It all depends on what kind of physician you are and in Optometry what mode of practice you end up in (private, commercial, group).

 

[deleted103644]

Don't count on it. You really, really want a trained ophthalmologist messing with your eyes, not some guy with no surgical training. The difference between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist are vast. One has a four year degree, the other has a medical degree and five years or more of surgical training. It's like the difference between an orthopaedic surgeon and a chiropractor.

If there's one area (besides brain surgery) where midlevels definitely do not belong it's anything havng to do with cutting into, lasing, or altering the eye.

Already a good part of basic laser eye surgical procedures are automated enough that technicians can do most of the work, do you really think optometrists can't get in on the action? The better machines can correct automatically for eye movements - I believe with more accuracy than your typical human controller. Frankly, as much as I'd like to think that whatever training I get in medical school will be indispensable for being a doctor, I'd say it's a safe bet that most of what has been required of doctors in the past will be automated/computerized, if not outsourced. E.g., radiology.

 

[pennybridge]

Already a good part of basic laser eye surgical procedures are automated enough that technicians can do most of the work, do you really think optometrists can't get in on the action? The better machines can correct automatically for eye movements - I believe with more accuracy than your typical human controller. Frankly, as much as I'd like to think that whatever training I get in medical school will be indispensable for being a doctor, I'd say it's a safe bet that most of what has been required of doctors in the past will be automated/computerized, if not outsourced. E.g., radiology.

you can put that on your shingle then.

"I'm no doctor, but I'm the next best thing!"

 

[AnesthesiaMD]

Thats a pro for opto in my book...

BTW, just to clear up the issue of salary:

If an optometrist was making $110,000, would his financial state be all that better from a doctor (say internist) who is making $150,000? Is there really that much of a noticeable difference in financial lifestyle?

Opthalmologists make a lot more than an Optometrist...I shadowed an Opthalmologist over Christmas break and he told me he gets $1,600 for a 10 minute cataract surgery and he's averaging 10 of those each week. That is, if money is your concern.

 

[hye345]

Opthalmologists make a lot more than an Optometrist...I shadowed an Opthalmologist over Christmas break and he told me he gets $1,600 for a 10 minute cataract surgery and he's averaging 10 of those each week. That is, if money is your concern.

I'm not trying to compare OMD vs OD. This is partly because, as you guys have made it perfectly clear, there is little comparison. Besides dealing with eyes, the only thing that is the same for both professions is the lifestyle (maybe).

If I do go into medicine, I will not go with the OMD path; it too competitive, the training takes too long, and I'm not all that interested in the eyes to begin with (at least not "surgically" interested). All of this is subjective, though; I'm sure that some premeds are just brimming, and can't wait to do LASIK for the first time... And I am very happy for their newfound epiphany. Good luck.

I'm trying to compare the average doc to the average optometrist across the board; money, hours, difficulty level, stress level, etc...

 

[NonTradMed]

If I do go into medicine, I will not go with the OMD path; it too competitive, the training takes too long, and I'm not all that interested in the eyes to begin with (at least not "surgically" interested). All of this is subjective, though; I'm sure that some premeds are just brimming, and can't wait to do LASIK for the first time... And I am very happy for their newfound epiphany. Good luck.

I'm trying to compare the average doc to the average optometrist across the board; money, hours, difficulty level, stress level, etc...

Trying shadowing both and see. Asking a bunch of health professional students on an annoymous board probably isn't going to give you the answers you want.

 

[8744]

Already a good part of basic laser eye surgical procedures are automated enough that technicians can do most of the work, do you really think optometrists can't get in on the action? The better machines can correct automatically for eye movements - I believe with more accuracy than your typical human controller. Frankly, as much as I'd like to think that whatever training I get in medical school will be indispensable for being a doctor, I'd say it's a safe bet that most of what has been required of doctors in the past will be automated/computerized, if not outsourced. E.g., radiology.

Sure buddy, but we're talking about the eyes. Would you trust your eyes to a technician with a two-year associates degree? To an optometrist? Not any time soon.

 

[Depakote]

Physician by knockout in the 4th round.

The optometrist would win... if he had a knife.

(seriously, I thought of the same thing you did when I saw this thread title)

 

[hye345]

Clearly you should do a little bit more research. We deal with insurance extensively on a daily basis.... Sadly.

But do you guys get BSed around as much as MDs? I doubt it...

 

[NEATOMD]

we all know what he means. you are more likely to save lives as a physician than as an optometrist. you are probably very likely to have saved at least one life by the time you are done with your training. can an optometrist say the same?
its not romantic. its statistical reality.

Is that a joke? I hope so. Otherwise it's not thought through very hard.

How does an ophthalmologist save more lives than an optometrist? Retinal, cataract, and lasik surgeries don't save many lives.

Why on earth would vision be important for someone's life anyway? Ever heard of an automobile? People drive into eye appointments with vision impairments that should be keeping them off the road quite frequently. Optometrist have the ability to either repair those problems or prevent them from driving.

I was talking to an optometry student yesterday who picked up on an neuroma earlier in the day through an eye exam.

 

[pennybridge]

blah blah blah outrage

OP doesn't ask to compare ophthalmologists with optometrists, he asked to compare physicians with optometrists.

Optometrists aren't in the business of saving lives.

Nobody says "I want to save lives, that's why I became an optometrist"

Physicians can say "I save lives on a regular basis" and be taken seriously.

this is the pre-allo board, right? 😴

 

[NEATOMD]

Sure buddy, but we're talking about the eyes. Would you trust your eyes to a technician with a two-year associates degree? To an optometrist? Not any time soon.

I don't think you know much about an optometrist's schooling. An optometrist with equal amount of training on a machine could do an equivalent job.

Actually, I spent some this past summer at one of the top eye clinics in the US. I spent time observing LASIK, YAG, Cataract surgeries, punctal plugs, etc etc and just normal eye checkups. I'm a medical student, but observed both the ophthalmologists and optometrists. Guess what, most of the time, you couldn't tell the difference between the two. A few times, a patient would ask for one of the ophtho's to come see them when they had a question about a diagnosis (or whatever). Every time, he would reiterate what the optometrist had already said (and the primary reason people seemed to want to see this doctor is because his name is on the clinic).

As far as scope of practice goes, there really was a pretty seemless interaction. Typically, an ocular tech would take the patient to the lane and do the basics of the exam. The OD's did initial consultations, diagnostic type work (ie: cataract, glaucoma) and pre/post operative workups (how did the surgery turn out?) and some procedures, such as punctal plugs. The MD's did pre-op consultation (ie:is this surgery right for you), diagnostic work (exact same as the OD's), pre/post op follow-ups (on patient's referred by the OD's that needed additional surgery), surgical proceedures (but each had his own set of proceedures according to his specialization)

For what it's worth, I know OD dropout's have aced med school and vice versa. I even know a med school graduate offered an ophtho residency who is now in optometry school because he wants to do low-vision and there is no ophtho low vision specialty.

There are positive's and negatives to each.

One more thing, the whole point someone made earlier about optometry and dentistry being too focused is really deceptive, even MD's have to choose what to specialize in some time or another. IE: Even those ophtho's I referred to above had limitations within their field. There's no way you'd ever see an ophtho doing cardiac surgery or a cardiac surgeon performing LASIK. Sure, either could go back and take a residency. But, an OD could just as easily go to MD or DDS school to enlarge their scope. Plus, there is a lot of variations in eye care and dentistry if you're really interested.

 

[NEATOMD]

OP doesn't ask to compare ophthalmologists with optometrists, he asked to compare physicians with optometrists.

Optometrists aren't in the business of saving lives.

Nobody says "I want to save lives, that's why I became an optometrist"

Physicians can say "I save lives on a regular basis" and be taken seriously.

this is the pre-allo board, right? 😴

Oh, so you know of an ophtho who walks around telling people he's in it to save lives?

If you paid attention to the post you were debating you'd see I wasn't directing my statement to the OP...

 

[pennybridge]

Oh, so you know of an ophtho who walks around telling people he's in it to save lives?

If you paid attention to the post you were debating you'd see I wasn't directing my statement to the OP...

the post you quoted was not referring specifically to ophthalmologists, it was referring to physicians in general, as was the OP, and thus the whole thread.

If you want to discuss the differences between ophthalmology and optometry, you could start your own thread that isn't already a great big rolling cluster****, and it would probably make more sense.

As it stands now, you're all idiots and if you want to be an optometrist and not a doctor:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/forumdisplay.php?f=159

go nuts!

 

[NEATOMD]

h
how much you want to bet radtechs are the first ones to diagnose a bunch of broken bones??

Since you already seem a bit annoyed by me, let me just go ahead and point out that you have to be a doctor (or PA, I guess) to actually diagnose. The tech might be the first to see the bone on the radiograph, but the doc would still have to diagnose. So, I think that's where the analogy falls apart.

Optometry and Physicians are medical equivalents in that each has a doctorate and each is able to diagnose and treat medical diseases. Radiologists and radtech's have a much greater disparity in training and level of certification.

 

[NEATOMD]

As it stands now, you're all idiots and if you want to be an optometrist and not a doctor:

You don't even make sense. Optometrists have OD degrees, which stands for "Optometry Doctor".

the post you quoted was not referring specifically to ophthalmologists, it was referring to physicians in general, as was the OP, and thus the whole thread.

Quite a few posts in this thread, including your own have been discussing optometry versus ophthalmology. And rightfully so, it's an inherent part of this discussion.

You really know what you're talking about, don't you?👍

Here's a link for you:http://forums.studentdoctor.net/login.php?do=logout&logouthash=81ecb29ce04454d5fcd695dc19414a84

 

[pennybridge]

you have to be a doctor (or PA, I guess) to actually diagnose.

so someone with a PhD in English can diagnose? oh ****! semantics are fun!

oh and nurse prac, they're not doctors but diagnose. 😱

The tech might be the first to see the bone on the radiograph, but the doc would still have to diagnose. So, I think that's where the analogy falls apart.

Yeah I'm sure after someone goes for a contact fitting and the OD "diagnoses" something wonky, the contact lense consumer is NOT going to go straight to an ophthalmologist (because they're practically obsolete now that we have laser-guided optometrists)

You don't even make sense. Optometrists have OD degrees, which stands for "Optometry Doctor".

see above for stupidity in arguing semantics, if an Optometrist says "I'm a doctor!" and someone says "what kind?" and they say "Optometrist" other person says "oh" really disappointed.

Quite a few posts in this thread, including your own have been discussing optometry versus ophthalmology. And rightfully so, it's an inherent part of this discussion.

yet, the post you quoted (re: saving lives) wasn't comparing opto with ophthalmology, but great job dodging that one. In fact, none of the posts using the words "saving" and "lives" combined were referring to specifically ophtalmologists, they were referring the collective whole of all physicians, in contrast to optometrists, who for whatever didn't go to medical school to become medical doctors and therefore can't share in the spoils of doing a job that isn't lame.

as I said before, if you think optometry is the bee's knees, then by all means start a thread with the intent of convincing young physicians-to-be to drop their medical aspirations and pursue the noble profession of vision correction. I'm sure you'll have plenty of takers on THE GOD DAMNED PRE-ALLO FORUM.

 

[QuantumMechanic]

so someone with a PhD in English can diagnose? oh ****! semantics are fun!

oh and nurse prac, they're not doctors but diagnose. 😱


Yeah I'm sure after someone goes for a contact fitting and the OD "diagnoses" something wonky, the contact lense consumer is NOT going to go straight to an ophthalmologist (because they're practically obsolete now that we have laser-guided optometrists)



see above for stupidity in arguing semantics, if an Optometrist says "I'm a doctor!" and someone says "what kind?" and they say "Optometrist" other person says "oh" really disappointed.


yet, the post you quoted (re: saving lives) wasn't comparing opto with ophthalmology, but great job dodging that one. In fact, none of the posts using the words "saving" and "lives" combined were referring to specifically ophtalmologists, they were referring the collective whole of all physicians, in contrast to optometrists, who for whatever didn't go to medical school to become medical doctors and therefore can't share in the spoils of doing a job that isn't lame.

as I said before, if you think optometry is the bee's knees, then by all means start a thread with the intent of convincing young physicians-to-be to drop their medical aspirations and pursue the noble profession of vision correction. I'm sure you'll have plenty of takers on THE GOD DAMNED PRE-ALLO FORUM.

http://www.opted.org/info_faq.cfm#1

What do Doctors of Optometry do?
Optometrists perform comprehensive examinations of both the internal and external structures of the eye, carry out subjective and objective tests to evaluate patients' vision, analyze the test findings, establish a diagnosis, and determine the appropriate treatment. Optometrists treat a variety of conditions and illnesses. They treat eye diseases such as glaucoma and ulcers; visual skill problems such as the inability to move, align, fixate and focus the eye; and clarity problems such as simple near or farsightedness or complications due to the aging process, disease, accident, or malfunction. 

Additionally, optometrists diagnose, manage, and refer systemic diseases such as hypertension, diabetes, and others that are often first detected in the eye; provide pre- and post- surgical care for cataracts, refractive laser treatment, retinal problems, and other conditions; and encourage preventative measures such as monitoring infants' and children's visual development, evaluating job/school/hobby related tasks, and promoting nutrition and hygiene education. 

The day-to-day tasks of most Doctors of Optometry can be quite varied and challenging. Patient interaction can range from performing routine visual exams, removing a foreign body from the cornea, evaluating a child who is not performing well in school, managing the care of contact lens patients, prescribing medication for glaucoma, providing follow-up care after refractive surgery, and fitting a legally blind patient with a magnifying device that will enable the patient to read.

 

[NEATOMD]

Calm down pennybridge.

Your semantical error was blatantly wrong and based on a misperception or maybe just a lack of knowledge. Mine was wrong* solely based on a technicality which ignored the fact that I was referring to medicine (aren't you the one who's been preaching about staying on the topic of the thread?).

The post I was originally replying to said "you are probably very likely to have saved at least one life by the time you are done with your training. can an optometrist say the same?" And my point was that optometrists have as good a likely hood of saving lives as some physicians do during their careers. The problem is that the statement I quoted appeared to be indicating that physicians save lives no matter what kind of physicians they are (and I believe that was the intent). I used ophtho as an example to refute that point. I think we can both agree then that an ophthalmologist has a similar likely hood of "saving lives" as an optometrist does. That was my point. I could have just as easily said the same referring to physiatrists, pathologist, and various other types of "physicians." And since I'm assuming your post regarding saving lives was relative to this thread, and considering the amount of opt/ophtho posts prior to mine on this thread and the fact that the primary difference in scope of practice between the two regards ability to perform surgical procedures (which was also brought up by you in the second post on this thread) my post was more than relevant to this thread. The point main point is this: Don't choose based on being able to exclaim that you saved a life or two on your death bed. You can do that as an EMT or a hundred other professions that don't require nearly as much schooling.

I'll agree that NP's can diagnose, but like I said...radtech's don't diagnose while OD's can diagnose anything that an ophtho can. The truth is that you don't know much about optometry and got yourself in too deep and are now trying to shout your way to victory as if using bad language and insults will make you look more correct. Let me give you a hint, it makes you look immature.

If you really want to get on an ego trip about who's the most elite in medicine, compare med school entrance stats to vet schools, then the curriculums, and salaries. Most OD's are not OD's because they couldn't become the all powerful MD just like not all MD's are MD's because they couldn't hack vet school.

I went into medical school because I prefer allopathic medicine. However, I have the ability to realize that there are other good profession out there besides allopathic medicine. Ophthalmology is currently on the top of my list for residency, but I still see the value of the optometry profession. I'm attempting to provide an unbiased view to help the OP make his/her decision. Despite what you may believe, I'm actually biased towards MD's (OD's can also be considered physicians, but that's just another semantic meant for another thread). And I happened to post as I did because I don't believe that feeding the OP wrong information will help him/her make his/her decision. It's ok that you prefer allopathic medicine, it's expected, but insulting another profession, being immature, and being rude isn't going to make allopathic medicine look better to the OP and is very unprofessional.

 

[deleted103644]

you can put that on your shingle then.

"I'm no doctor, but I'm the next best thing!"

Haha, should have replied to this awhile ago. I was just playing devil's advocate - I'm going for an M.D. But if you don't acknowledge that a lot of what doctors are paid extremely well for now will be changed by technology so that a less trained and less well paid individual can do it, you'll be in for some shocks in the future. Just think of all the machinery that used to require very skilled individuals with a deep understanding of the design to build that can now be assembled by machines and cheap labor. Medicine doesn't have to worry about this so much now, but for how much longer?

 

[QuantumMechanic]

Just think of all the machinery that used to require very skilled individuals with a deep understanding of the design to build that can now be assembled by machines and cheap labor. Medicine doesn't have to worry about this so much now, but for how much longer?

this is something our generation won't be concerned with.

 

[hye345]

this is something our generation won't be concerned with.

Seconded.

The reason is simple, yet ironic: A radiologist (or any doctor) reading images overseas can't get sued by the legal system in the US.

Can you imagine how embarassing it would be for a hospital if they get sued, and during the lawsuit, it was discovered that they were hiring foreign doctors that weren't even certified under US law?