The cost of going to Optometrist vs. Ophthalmologist

This forum made possible through the generous support of
SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

od2b77

Member
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Jun 29, 2004
Messages
80
Reaction score
0
I was asked if someone has a medical insurance with $10 copayment and vision insurance that just gives a % off the eye exam (like 20 to 30% off), why would they go to an optometrist and pay around $45 for an eye exam plus various other fees depending on what they get done ( $30 with 30% off), when they can go to ophthalmologist and pay $10 to $20 for the entire visit. My thoughts were that most vision insurances fully cover an eye exam once a year or once every 2 years. Curious what do other people think about this. Is that true that you can only pay the doctor visit copayment and get everything that normally can be done at optometrists office, done at ophthalmologist's office?
Thanks!

Members don't see this ad.
 
od2b77 said:
I was asked if someone has a medical insurance with $10 copayment and vision insurance that just gives a % off the eye exam (like 20 to 30% off), why would they go to an optometrist and pay around $45 for an eye exam plus various other fees depending on what they get done ( $30 with 30% off), when they can go to ophthalmologist and pay $10 to $20 for the entire visit. My thoughts were that most vision insurances fully cover an eye exam once a year or once every 2 years. Curious what do other people think about this. Is that true that you can only pay the doctor visit copayment and get everything that normally can be done at optometrists office, done at ophthalmologist's office?
Thanks!

Many "vision insurances" are not actually insurances, but merely discount plans.

If the optometrist is also a provider for the medical plan, then you can see the optometrist as well.

You could likely get the same services at an ophthalmology office that you can at an optometrist office, though some ophthalmogy offices do not offer contact lens services.

In your situation, it sounds like the patient would get much better benefit using their medical insurance rather than their vision plan and as such, they should see either an optometrist or ophthalmologist who is a provider on their medical insurance plan.
 
Many medical plans do not cover routine eye exams at either an OD's office or an OMD's office. In the case that there is a medical diagnosis, such as cataracts then a patient can be seen by any provider on their insurance panel. In Washington state, it is against the law to not allow OD's to participate in any plan that an OMD can.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Ben Chudner said:
Many medical plans do not cover routine eye exams at either an OD's office or an OMD's office. In the case that there is a medical diagnosis, such as cataracts then a patient can be seen by any provider on their insurance panel. In Washington state, it is against the law to not allow OD's to participate in any plan that an OMD can.

Exactly..

For ex. you are 25yr old w/o any medical complaints and only clinical finding is 'myopia' then, you are screwed..

Typically, optometrist will charge you ~$65 for exam while ophthalmologist will charge you $130 based on medicare reimbursement for comprehensive eye exam with refraction. Which one would you choose??? 🙂
 
Tasteestuff said:
Exactly..

For ex. you are 25yr old w/o any medical complaints and only clinical finding is 'myopia' then, you are screwed..

Typically, optometrist will charge you ~$65 for exam while ophthalmologist will charge you $130 based on medicare reimbursement for comprehensive eye exam with refraction. Which one would you choose??? 🙂

Does this mean that a person cannot just pay $10/$20 doctors office copayment and get a routine eye exam from an ophthalmologist? Like you pay when you go in for a physical exam to a physicians office... Or do you mean that if no serious diseases were found, then he/she would have to pay around $130? And if a serious disease was found than it is $10/$20? So does the ophthalmologist's care covered by medical insurance or vision insurance? Because if its vision insurance than copayment won't apply and services would be more expensive. Thank you very much for all your help. Its just worries me that if people have an option of getting routine eye exams from ophthalmologist for just a copayment, why would they go to an optometrist and pay more? 😕
 
Tasteestuff said:
Exactly..

For ex. you are 25yr old w/o any medical complaints and only clinical finding is 'myopia' then, you are screwed..

Typically, optometrist will charge you ~$65 for exam while ophthalmologist will charge you $130 based on medicare reimbursement for comprehensive eye exam with refraction. Which one would you choose??? 🙂


That's incorrect. There will be a similar charge based on the complexity of the service. If insurance or medicare is getting billed, nobody gets to charge more just because they feel like it.
 
od2b77 said:
Does this mean that a person cannot just pay $10/$20 doctors office copayment and get a routine eye exam from an ophthalmologist? Like you pay when you go in for a physical exam to a physicians office... Or do you mean that if no serious diseases were found, then he/she would have to pay around $130? And if a serious disease was found than it is $10/$20? So does the ophthalmologist's care covered by medical insurance or vision insurance? Because if its vision insurance than copayment won't apply and services would be more expensive. Thank you very much for all your help. Its just worries me that if people have an option of getting routine eye exams from ophthalmologist for just a copayment, why would they go to an optometrist and pay more? 😕

Again,

In theory a patient could see either an ophthalmologist or an optometrist for a routine exam.

If there is no medical related complaint or diagnosis, their vision insurance should be billed by either the OMD or the OD and they should pay the appropriate copayment for their vision insurance.

If there IS a medical related complaint or diagnosis, their health insurance should be billed by either the OMD or the OD and they should pay the appropriate copayment for their health insurance.

HOWEVER.....

Many "vision insurance" plans are not actually insurance plans. They are simply discount plans whereby the member gets a discount. If this is the plan they want to use, then usually they will end up paying more for an exam by an OMD than by an OD because most OMDs charge more for their "routine exams" than ODs do.

Does that help explain things?

Jenny
 
JennyW said:
Again,

In theory a patient could see either an ophthalmologist or an optometrist for a routine exam.

If there is no medical related complaint or diagnosis, their vision insurance should be billed by either the OMD or the OD and they should pay the appropriate copayment for their vision insurance.

If there IS a medical related complaint or diagnosis, their health insurance should be billed by either the OMD or the OD and they should pay the appropriate copayment for their health insurance.

HOWEVER.....

Many "vision insurance" plans are not actually insurance plans. They are simply discount plans whereby the member gets a discount. If this is the plan they want to use, then usually they will end up paying more for an exam by an OMD than by an OD because most OMDs charge more for their "routine exams" than ODs do.

Does that help explain things?

Jenny

It does, thanks. If I understood you correctly, health insurance only comes into play when there is a serious medical diagnosis (glaucoma, cataracts...)
 
mdkurt said:
That's incorrect. There will be a similar charge based on the complexity of the service. If insurance or medicare is getting billed, nobody gets to charge more just because they feel like it.

That's CORRECT. What I am trying to say is that IF the diagnosis is NOT of medical origin, Opt. or Opth. will charge patient out of their pocket for their visit.
Unfortunately, my fellow optometrists (perhaps due to competition from each other) never charge what we should be charging. Medicare states that a comprehensive exam should cost around ~$120 which Oph. has no problems charging BUT optometrists charge $60 for the same services for the fear that this patient will go to the mall or Walmart and get a vision exam.

It is very frustrating and makes me angry that my fellow optometrist keep lowering the price of our services and making us seem less than adequate in providing a quality eye/vision care.

Ex. In Atlanta where my friend practices, there is an optometrist who started to charge $0 IF patient agrees to buy glasses from him.. --> WTF !!
Another one charges $29 for a comprehensive eye exam.

No wonder the general population is beginning to see us just like 'Supercuts'; walk in without appointments, expect to be serviced ASAP for $19.99.. Even better, walk in with COUPONS and wanting a comprehensive eye exam for 'buy one and get one free' attitude. 😡
What the Heck is going on..!!! We need to stop doing that
 
od2b77 said:
It does, thanks. If I understood you correctly, health insurance only comes into play when there is a serious medical diagnosis (glaucoma, cataracts...)

It doesn't have to be a "serious" medical diagnosis.

I've had a few patients come and say "What's this dark spot on my eyeball?" and it's an Axenfeld loop. THat goes under their health insurance.

In general, I use vision insurances ONLY when the patients come in and say "I'm just here for my annual checkup." Even if they have a symptom of "my vision is blurry" I bill their medical.

Jenny
 
Tasteestuff said:
Ex. In Atlanta...Another one charges $29 for a comprehensive eye exam.

Hey I resemble that comment! I work for that guy. 😱
 
xmattODx said:
Hey I resemble that comment! I work for that guy. 😱

Yikes 😱

I am sure you have heard one of those "Are you a REAL doctor?" questions. 😉
 
Are there states where free eye exams are illegal? One time I heard something like that.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
J.opt said:
Are there states where free eye exams are illegal? One time I heard something like that.

I do not believe that there are any states where free exams are illegal. We all do free exams once in a while for indigent patients.

I do think that some states have specific statutes making it illegal to tie the "free exam" to the purchase of materials though.

I also believe that in some other states, the practice of "free eye exam with purchase of glasses" is legal, but to ADVERTISE IT is illegal. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but that's the legal system for you.

Jenny
 
JennyW said:
I do not believe that there are any states where free exams are illegal. We all do free exams once in a while for indigent patients.

I do think that some states have specific statutes making it illegal to tie the "free exam" to the purchase of materials though.

I also believe that in some other states, the practice of "free eye exam with purchase of glasses" is legal, but to ADVERTISE IT is illegal. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but that's the legal system for you.

Jenny
Oh OK,
I think it’s in Colombia where they free exams are not allowed. Venezuelan optometrists have been pushing for a similar law to be passed in their country, but they are far from it.
 
JennyW said:
I do not believe that there are any states where free exams are illegal. We all do free exams once in a while for indigent patients.

I do think that some states have specific statutes making it illegal to tie the "free exam" to the purchase of materials though.

I also believe that in some other states, the practice of "free eye exam with purchase of glasses" is legal, but to ADVERTISE IT is illegal. Doesn't make a lot of sense, but that's the legal system for you.

Jenny
Jenny is correct. In some states you cannot advertise a free exam with purchase of materials. What chains do is advertise a price for materials and eye exam which is still much lower than any private doc can charge for materials only, not to mention an eye exam.

By the way, not all OD's charge $60 for an exam. My exam fee is $185 for a comprehensive new patient visit with refraction.
 
Tasteestuff said:
Yikes 😱

I am sure you have heard one of those "Are you a REAL doctor?" questions. 😉

Private practice, commercial practice. It doesn't matter where you practice some will ask that question.
 
[cheapened .

It is very frustrating and makes me angry that my fellow optometrist keep lowering the price of our services and making us seem less than adequate in providing a quality eye/vision care.

Ex. In Atlanta where my friend practices, there is an optometrist who started to charge $0 IF patient agrees to buy glasses from him.. --> WTF !!
Another one charges $29 for a comprehensive eye exam.

No wonder the general population is beginning to see us just like 'Supercuts'; walk in without appointments, expect to be serviced ASAP for $19.99.. Even better, walk in with COUPONS and wanting a comprehensive eye exam for 'buy one and get one free' attitude. 😡
What the Heck is going on..!!! We need to stop doing that[/QUOTE]



Welcome to the wonderful world of Commercial Optometry. Giving a free, or a discounted eye examination if the “customer” purchased glasses was common in the 1920-30’s. What’s amazing is that similar business practices are still used today, mostly by retail chains. I recently saw a coupon from Doctor’s Vision Works offering an eye exam for ONE DOLLAR if you purchase a pair of designer frame and lens, or a contact lens package. What’s unfortunate is that there are private docs OD’s, and yes OMD that feel they must compete and will also run coupon advertisements.

As most of you must know, Commercial Optometry has always been a sore spot. From the mid 1950 through the 70’s, as organized Optometry evolved, commercial and private practicing OD’s feuded because “commercial OD’s cheapened the profession”. There was even some state optometric associations would not allow commercial practicing OD’s membership.

Just a side questions to all. Would you consider referring your patient to another OD for specific things such as a second opinion, V.T., specialty contact lens fitting, children’ vision, or low vision?
 
rpie said:
Just a side questions to all. Would you consider referring your patient to another OD for specific things such as a second opinion, V.T., specialty contact lens fitting, children’ vision, or low vision?

I have referred patients to another OD for low vision and VT. I have even referred to a contact lens specialist that is not an OD for a very difficult Keratoconus RGP fit beacuse he had a much better fitting set than I do. As for children's vision, I usually send to a Peds OMD if I have any concerns. I would probably not refer any disease to another OD for a second opinion. The reason I would rather send to an OMD for children and disease is beacuse of liability. I believe that a second opinion should be from someone that specializes in whatever it is I need the opinion on. Just as a general OMD would not send a retina or glaucoma question to another general OMD, I see no reason to send to another OD. I would prefer to send to the specialist.

I know that there is an increasing amount of OD's that are doing "fellowships" in glaucoma and retina. The sad truth is that these are in no way the same as the fellowships that OMD's go through. Another point, is that let's say I think one of my diabetic patients has CSME. Why would I send to an OD when even if the OD agrees, the patient will still have to be sent to the OMD for treatment? In the worst case, what if that OD disagrees with me and says there is no CSME and the patient never receives treatment. If the OD is wrong, I have no leg to stand on in court because I did not refer to a specialist. If I referred the same patient to a retina specialist and he/she chooses not to perform laser and the patient loses vision, I will still be sued, but I am covered because I made the apropriate referral.

I have nothing against referring to OD's, as I get glaucoma referrals from corporate docs all the time. I just don't feel comfortable with doing it and maybe it's because of the OD's in my town. I also have worked in the same office as the retina, glaucoma, and cataract OMD's in town so I have a great working relationship with them. The retina guy sends me a lot of patients that need a routine exam after he no longer needs to see them.
 
Ben Chudner said:
I have referred patients to another OD for low vision and VT. I have even referred to a contact lens specialist that is not an OD for a very difficult Keratoconus RGP fit beacuse he had a much better fitting set than I do. As for children's vision, I usually send to a Peds OMD if I have any concerns. I would probably not refer any disease to another OD for a second opinion. The reason I would rather send to an OMD for children and disease is beacuse of liability. I believe that a second opinion should be from someone that specializes in whatever it is I need the opinion on. Just as a general OMD would not send a retina or glaucoma question to another general OMD, I see no reason to send to another OD. I would prefer to send to the specialist.

I know that there is an increasing amount of OD's that are doing "fellowships" in glaucoma and retina. The sad truth is that these are in no way the same as the fellowships that OMD's go through. Another point, is that let's say I think one of my diabetic patients has CSME. Why would I send to an OD when even if the OD agrees, the patient will still have to be sent to the OMD for treatment? In the worst case, what if that OD disagrees with me and says there is no CSME and the patient never receives treatment. If the OD is wrong, I have no leg to stand on in court because I did not refer to a specialist. If I referred the same patient to a retina specialist and he/she chooses not to perform laser and the patient loses vision, I will still be sued, but I am covered because I made the apropriate referral.

I have nothing against referring to OD's, as I get glaucoma referrals from corporate docs all the time. I just don't feel comfortable with doing it and maybe it's because of the OD's in my town. I also have worked in the same office as the retina, glaucoma, and cataract OMD's in town so I have a great working relationship with them. The retina guy sends me a lot of patients that need a routine exam after he no longer needs to see them.


It is good to see that you are open to referring to fellow OD’s, as should be the case between all OD’s. I also agree that diseases should be managed/co-managed with a fellowship trained Ophtho. Sub-specialist.

A question to all opt students, does your School encouraging inter-professional referrals?

(After coming back from a 3-month lecture/CE/vacation, I noticed that you and Andrew are having an interesting debate.) 😉
 
rpie said:
(After coming back from a 3-month lecture/CE/vacation, I noticed that you and Andrew are having an interesting debate.) 😉
Andrew is very passionate about protecting ophthalmology, which I respect. I must, however, respectfully disagree with his assertion that OD's are unqualified to perform anterior segment lasers.
 
Ben Chudner said:
Andrew is very passionate about protecting ophthalmology, which I respect. I must, however, respectfully disagree with his assertion that OD's are unqualified to perform anterior segment lasers.

I also debated with Andrew and Mdkurt about Lasers and the Optometric scope of practice , 😉 and agree that OD’s can manage laser procedures safely.

Commenting on the patient that was referred for a LPI, but was treated with medications instead. Regardless of if the referring OD asked, “do you have pain”; which Andrew is using to point out that OD’s training is deficient. I get the sense that the referring OD was not comfortable managing this patient, and suggested the possibility of LPI procedure in order to justify the highest-level referral. (Which apparently was to an academic institution , U of I, and not the local OMD.)

I’m sure that a bright glaucoma sub-specialist or a general would take the LPI cue and inform the patient that although Lasers are used in treating certain glaucomatous conditions medication is what is indicated at this time. This way the patient feel’s good about everyone involved in his treatment.

If we all take a team approach to caring for patient, I believe that looking for errors when a referral is made would not be an issue.The main point is that the correct referral was made and the patient got treatment. I think this case also shows that most OD’s tend to be cautious and will not hesitate to refer to the OMD when they feel uneasy.
 
rpie said:
If we all take a team approach to caring for patient, I believe that looking for errors when a referral is made would not be an issue.The main point is that the correct referral was made and the patient got treatment. I think this case also shows that most OD’s tend to be cautious and will not hesitate to refer to the OMD when they feel uneasy.
We all have examples of OMD's that performed surgery when they shouldn't have or completely botched the case. I agree with you that it is counterproductive to bring these cases up, but OMD's are very concerned that we will take a piece of their pie with lasers, and using scare tactics like this seem to be their only defense. I find it interesting that no one has been able to come up with anything out of OK where this patient would probably not been referred to the OMD, since the OK docs have the necessary training on how and when to perform laser procedures. If they can't prove that OD's have caused harm to patients through the use of lasers, how can they argue we can't be trained to use lasers?

I have come to the realization that neither side will ever agree on this and the legislators will have to decide fo us.
 
Ben Chudner said:
I find it interesting that no one has been able to come up with anything out of OK where this patient would probably not been referred to the OMD, since the OK docs have the necessary training on how and when to perform laser procedures.

Any idea on what exactly this training is? As I understand it, the training involves a few extra hours of lecture and a handful of cases done under supervision. If that's not the case, please enlighten me. For now, let's not get into whether or not this is adequate.
 
mdkurt said:
Any idea on what exactly this training is? As I understand it, the training involves a few extra hours of lecture and a handful of cases done under supervision. If that's not the case, please enlighten me. For now, let's not get into whether or not this is adequate.
Unfortunately, I did not graduate from NSUCO so I cannot give you all of the courses they took to prepare them. I attended a weekend course and received my certification that built upon my knowledge of the eye and its structures. Much like the general ophthalmologist down the road from me that took a weekend course on LASIK, performed one case and now calls himself a Refractive Surgery Specialist. Or the ENT doc that took a weekend course and now advertises eyelid procedures, when there is a fellowship trained oculaplastic specialist in the same medical center, operating out of the same ASC. OMD's like to make it sound like the education we receive is not adequate, and like to point to guys like me and say "look he only did a weekend course with a few cases under supervision". The truth is we are trained throughout our four years on the eye and its structures and when YAG's, ALT's and LPI's are indicated. We are also trained on complications of those procedures and how to manage them. The weekend course is designed to familiarize the attendees on the laser and how to operate it. We already have the educational background on ocular disease and management, just like OMD's already have the surgical skill set necessary to allow them to perform LASIK after a weekend course.

How about this....please enligten the OD's on what you think could happen during one of these procedures that an OD could not handle or refer to the appropriate specialist.
 
Ben Chudner said:
Unfortunately, I did not graduate from NSUCO so I cannot give you all of the courses they took to prepare them. I attended a weekend course and received my certification that built upon my knowledge of the eye and its structures. Much like the general ophthalmologist down the road from me that took a weekend course on LASIK, performed one case and now calls himself a Refractive Surgery Specialist. Or the ENT doc that took a weekend course and now advertises eyelid procedures, when there is a fellowship trained oculaplastic specialist in the same medical center, operating out of the same ASC. OMD's like to make it sound like the education we receive is not adequate, and like to point to guys like me and say "look he only did a weekend course with a few cases under supervision". The truth is we are trained throughout our four years on the eye and its structures and when YAG's, ALT's and LPI's are indicated. We are also trained on complications of those procedures and how to manage them. The weekend course is designed to familiarize the attendees on the laser and how to operate it. We already have the educational background on ocular disease and management, just like OMD's already have the surgical skill set necessary to allow them to perform LASIK after a weekend course.

How about this....please enligten the OD's on what you think could happen during one of these procedures that an OD could not handle or refer to the appropriate specialist.

I, for one, don't think the above is adequate.
 
xmattODx said:
I, for one, don't think the above is adequate.
Your school must not have prepared you very well. At UCBSO, we were trained on everything right up until actually hitting the button. The skill set required to actually shoot the laser is minimal. The other part of the procedure is similar to other procedures we already use. We know how to use a slit lamp. Applying a laser contact lens for Yag's and PI's is no different than a contact macular lens. For ALT's, we have been well trained in applying a gonio lens and identifying the angle structures. As for some of the more common complications, we know how to treat a spike in IOP. We can easily apply pressure using the contact lens if an iris vessel is hit inadvertantly. In the unlikely case that a RD occurs, we all know that even the general OMD would refer that to a retinal specialist.
 
Ben Chudner said:
Your school must not have prepared you very well. At UCBSO, we were trained on everything right up until actually hitting the button. The skill set required to actually shoot the laser is minimal. The other part of the procedure is similar to other procedures we already use. We know how to use a slit lamp. Applying a laser contact lens for Yag's and PI's is no different than a contact macular lens. For ALT's, we have been well trained in applying a gonio lens and identifying the angle structures. As for some of the more common complications, we know how to treat a spike in IOP. We can easily apply pressure using the contact lens if an iris vessel is hit inadvertantly. In the unlikely case that a RD occurs, we all know that even the general OMD would refer that to a retinal specialist.

You got it. My school didn't prepare me well. I went to optometry school.

I'm sure I got the exact education you did. I fired lasers but I don't think that the few hours of education we got doing this is equivalent to OMDs traing, nor do I believe that ODs using lasers is a public health benefit. The real question is if you don't forsee a financial benefit for ODs doing lasers whey would we? Just because we can? Wouldn't it make more sense financially to have fewer lasers doing more procedures rather than more lasers doing fewer procedures?
 
xmattODx said:
You got it. My school didn't prepare me well. I went to optometry school.

I'm sure I got the exact education you did. I fired lasers but I don't think that the few hours of education we got doing this is equivalent to OMDs traing, nor do I believe that ODs using lasers is a public health benefit. The real question is if you don't forsee a financial benefit for ODs doing lasers whey would we? Just because we can? Wouldn't it make more sense financially to have fewer lasers doing more procedures rather than more lasers doing fewer procedures?
This argument over and over again LOL. Let the government decide it.
 
xmattODx said:
I fired lasers but I don't think that the few hours of education we got doing this is equivalent to OMDs traing, nor do I believe that ODs using lasers is a public health benefit. The real question is if you don't forsee a financial benefit for ODs doing lasers whey would we? Just because we can? Wouldn't it make more sense financially to have fewer lasers doing more procedures rather than more lasers doing fewer procedures?
I'll pose the same question to you as I did to MDKurt. Where do you think the lack of education is? Remember, I am talking about only YAG's, LPI's, and ALT's. Do we not know how to use a slit lamp? Can we not identify the structures of the angle? Can we not apply a contact lens (gonio or laser)? I do not think OD's should get other surgical priviledges, such as cataract or even posterior segment laser, but I think we have the basic educational foundation for anterior segment lasers.

To answer you other question, I can only say that my motivation is rarely financial, and always for the benefit of patients. If I can save them a visit to another provider for a procedure I can perform, I will. For example, I don't send out my contact lens patients, and there is no money in contact lenses anymore. I could send them up the street to the contact lens technician at an OMD's office, but that would not benefit the patient. I do not offer procedures just because I can, I offer them in the best interests of my patients.
 
Ben Chudner said:
"look he only did a weekend course with a few cases under supervision".

You said it, not me. I'm going to take a few minutes to respond to this, even though my wife is rolling her eyes at me. I can appreciate that you must be a bright, motivated self-starter, because I'm sure a year at Bascom Palmer is not easy. I'm sure that you're so bright (seriously, no sarcasm here) that you can turn any educational experience into much more than it was intended to be. Take optometry school, for instance. Like your colleagues posting on this forum, even futuredoctorod, I don't think that optometric education on the whole can currently prepare optometrists to do surgery, including anterior segment lasers.

I had the opportunity during my residency to spend a fair amount of time with optometry students and residents at PCO during my residency, and I would have classified none of them as *****s. I certainly had a fair amount of respect for their profession, and (to the horror of many ophtho residents on this forum) allowed them to watch me perform LPIs, YAG capsulotomies, and DLTs. All I can say is that there's something about being trained to approach the eye from a surgical standpoint that sets the two professions apart. I think PCO is a fairly well-regarded school, but I got questions from those students that led me to believe that there was a fundamental lack of understanding. All of this transpired prior to the current major push for surgical privileges, so I didn't give it much thought. Now, of course, I'm absolutely incensed that a minority of optometrists think that a weekend course is adequate.

What could go wrong? Plenty.

What is your next step going to be when your angle closure patient doesn't respond to a PI? Send him/her packing to an ophthalmologist? Good choice, except that now the eye is angrier, the cornea has sloughed because of your attempt, and the patient has wasted another hour or two with an IOP in the stratosphere. That's going to be a treat to deal with.

What about DLTs? Pressure spikes that you can't handle. It's less common than it used to be, but not at all extinct. My last one was a long and protracted spike into the 50s that didn't even respond to Diamox. Two days later, I did a trab. Sure, you could send the patient off to the local ophthalmologist, but having to sort out someone else's mess and establish rapport right before surgerizing a patient isn't exactly optimum.

What about YAG capsulotomies? These are benign enough, but I'm of the opinion that if I put a lens in an eye, I don't want an optometrist mucking around with it. It's OK for the patient to make the hour's drive to be sure it's done right, because there's nothing like a nice big pit in the middle of the lens to make the patient happy. There are a good percentage of times when a patient's symptoms are generated by the lens, not the PCO, and doing a capsulotomy is only going to make the lens exchange that much more difficult. Again, this is a call I think only the surgeon should make.

Good God, I'm exhausted. I can appreciate that you're out to save the world with a laser, or at least save your patients a few bucks in gas, but let's consider something else. Each of your patients only has two eyes. That means that an individual patient can have a MAXIMUM of two capsulotomies, four DLTs (180 each time), and two PIs. That's eight trips that you've saved this remarkable patient over his or her LIFETIME. I don't know about you, but where I come from people think nothing of making an hour's drive to go to a decent mall, let alone have surgery.

I'll tell you what. Just to give us all a reality check and demonstrate how altruistic your field is, why don't you tell me how much the AOA would back a bill that allowed all anterior segment lasers except PRK, LASIK, and LASEK.

I'm going to bed now.
 
mdkurt said:
You said it, not me. I'm going to take a few minutes to respond to this, even though my wife is rolling her eyes at me. I can appreciate that you must be a bright, motivated self-starter, because I'm sure a year at Bascom Palmer is not easy. I'm sure that you're so bright (seriously, no sarcasm here) that you can turn any educational experience into much more than it was intended to be. Take optometry school, for instance. Like your colleagues posting on this forum, even futuredoctorod, I don't think that optometric education on the whole can currently prepare optometrists to do surgery, including anterior segment lasers.
That's funny, my wife is rolling her eyes too. You and I will never agree on this point, but I felt the need to respond just the same.

mdkurt said:
Now, of course, I'm absolutely incensed that a minority of optometrists think that a weekend course is adequate.
I am still waiting for any reported complication as a result of OK OD's performing these procedures. Your arguement is very compelling, but my training was very similar to a lot of the OK OD's. As I said, it is estimated that there are several thousand procedures performed by OD's in OK each year. Even at 1500 cases times 7 years, that's over 10,000 cases. That doesn't include the number of cases that were performed between 1987 and 1997. Pretty good track record, I would say.

mdkurt said:
What is your next step going to be when your angle closure patient doesn't respond to a PI?
I don't recall stating that I would treat acute angle closures. My experience with OK OD's is that they use PI's for narrow, potentially occuldable angles as prophylaxis as well as in cases of pressure spikes in pigment dispersion. Come to think of it, so did the general OMD I used to work for.

mdkurt said:
What about DLTs? Pressure spikes that you can't handle. It's less common than it used to be, but not at all extinct. My last one was a long and protracted spike into the 50s that didn't even respond to Diamox. Two days later, I did a trab. Sure, you could send the patient off to the local ophthalmologist, but having to sort out someone else's mess and establish rapport right before surgerizing a patient isn't exactly optimum.
It sounds like even you couldn't handle the pressure spike on this one, and waited two days to perform the trab. I don't know if you are a glaucoma specialist (I assume you are), but if the general OMD in my town had that same problem (and yes, the generals are performing ALT's in my town), they would send that patient off to the glaucoma specialist rather than perform the trab themself. How is that different than if the referral came from an OD?

mdkurt said:
What about YAG capsulotomies? These are benign enough, but I'm of the opinion that if I put a lens in an eye, I don't want an optometrist mucking around with it. It's OK for the patient to make the hour's drive to be sure it's done right, because there's nothing like a nice big pit in the middle of the lens to make the patient happy. There are a good percentage of times when a patient's symptoms are generated by the lens, not the PCO, and doing a capsulotomy is only going to make the lens exchange that much more difficult. Again, this is a call I think only the surgeon should make.
A pit is a complication that could and has happened to OMD's as well. Should we take away their priviledges? As for the lens generating the symptoms, I have never seen an OMD choose not to perform the YAG when I made the referral for it. I am sure it happens, I have just never seen it.

mdkurt said:
I'll tell you what. Just to give us all a reality check and demonstrate how altruistic your field is, why don't you tell me how much the AOA would back a bill that allowed all anterior segment lasers except PRK, LASIK, and LASEK.
I told you I do not speak for optometry, and I have no idea what their lobby efforts are. As I said above, you and I will never agree on this and quite frankly, I no longer wish to convince you. With the track record in OK, I doubt they will lose their laser law, and that may or may not help other states increase their scope. To be honest, I can't imagine many OD's purchasing a laser due to the cost and considering the low reimbursement levels, so this arguement may be simply academic. I appreciate your willingness to have a civilized discussion rather than simply attacking each other as some of the other posters have done.
 
Top