NM optometric bill

[John_Doe]

This member-related e-mail is a service offered to you as an Academy member.



January 29, 2007
New Mexico Optometrists Introduce Sweeping Surgery Bill

Patient safety has been put in serous jeopardy with last week's introduction of a bill that would add surgery to the optometric practice act in New Mexico. This bill extends far beyond the dangerous expansion bill that the Surgical Scope Fund helped defeat in 2005. Please join our fight with an immediate contribution.

This new legislation (S.B.367) exposes all of our patients to serious risk by:

allowing optometrists to perform invasive procedures such as removal of conjunctival and lid lesions, including tumors!
authorizing the N.M. Optometry Board to certify optometric use of SLTs, ALTs, YAG capsulotomies, YAG PIs and ARGON PIs!
permitting optometrists to administer a host of pharmaceuticals, including intravenous drugs (FA), local anesthetics and oral steroids!
We are working closely with the New Mexico Academy of Ophthalmology to aggressively defend M.D./D.O.-only eye surgery.

Please assist in our effort with an immediate contribution to the Surgical Scope Fund. Your support is an invaluable part of our mission to preserve the highest standards of surgical eye care..



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

American Academy of Ophthalmology
Governmental Affairs Division
Suite 700 | 1101 Vermont Avenue, NW | Washington, D.C. 20005-3570
Tel. 202.737.6662 | Fax 202.737.7061 | www.aao.org
------
note: last bill that passed the house and just barely missed passing in the state senate

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[exmike]

here we go again *sigh*
i get the feeling that organized opto wont stop until they get what they want

 

[eyerepairman]

lid lesions, including tumors

I know of one meticulous oculoplastic person that thinks that even ophthalmologists are often not qualified to do this, much less optometrists!

 

[eyerepairman]

Why doesn't ophthalmologists lobby for the right to do cataract surgery in dogs. In many states, this is not allowed!

Dog ophthalmologists are very few in number!

 

[scpichu888]

Why doesn't ophthalmologists lobby for the right to do cataract surgery in dogs. In many states, this is not allowed!

Dog ophthalmologists are very few in number!

wouldn't that be more of a veterinarian thing?
personally, i didn't go to med school to operate on animals as a living.

 

[Pinkertinkle]

wouldn't that be more of a veterinarian thing?
personally, i didn't go to med school to operate on animals as a living.

I think the point is ophthalmologists didn't go to school to operate on dogs, and optometrists didn't go to school to do complicated ocular surgery. Thus neither should lobby for the right to do what they didn't learn to do.

 

[JR]

I think the point is ophthalmologists didn't go to school to operate on dogs, and optometrists didn't go to school to do complicated ocular surgery. Thus neither should lobby for the right to do what they didn't learn to do.

For all the newly matched ophthalmology residents, take a look at these threads and see what we are up against:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=360854
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=327719
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=178529

 

[stonegoat]

I am a practicing OD, and I would have to say that I agree with ophthalmology on this one. ODs could be trained to perform many surgical procedures, however I don't really see the need. The vast majority of people both in Canada (where I am located) and in the US have good access to ophthalmic surgeons. I do not perceive a real need for ODs to expand their scope into the surgical theatre. There simply is not enough demand for surgical procedures to justify OD performing them. I do, however, thinks that ODs should have broad prescriptive authority, as we do encounter many eye and adnexal diseases that require pharmacological intervention, and we are already adequetely trained for this.

JP

 

[rubensan]

like glaucoma? what about new pharmacological interventions like lucentis? where do we draw lines?

I do, however, thinks that ODs should have broad prescriptive authority, as we do encounter many eye and adnexal diseases that require pharmacological intervention, and we are already adequetely trained for this.

JP

 

[stonegoat]

Where do we draw the line?....topicals....orals....injectables?
I thinks you are unsure of the moral/ethical fabric of ODs. I was trained to AND performed injections while in OD school. However, I will always refer patients to a retinal specialist if they require this type of treatment. As an ophthalmologist do you perform every major surgical procedure? Probably not, even though, legally, you can. Most cataract surgeons I know don't do complicated strabismus surgery, or repair major retinal detachments....they refer. Do you really think ODs are so ignorant as to be completely unaware of their limitations?? If you think that you are wrong....most ODs desire the best possible outcome for their patients and they will refer to the best person for the best result. Even completely unethical ODs (yes, our profession has a few) are still afraid of lawyers .

I think if you actually spent some time with a few ODs, you would find that we are not as dangerous as you imagine.

JP

 

[shredhog65]

Its not most OD's that we worry about. I realize that most of you are very good at what you do and desire the best outcome for your patients. ODs are an important part of the "eye care" system.

That being said, I know of several ODs that have and will try to perform proceedures they are not trained in and should not be doing. It is because of them that problems arise. Obviously someone is lobbying to have OD surgery put on state legislation bills. Who do you think it is?

BTW - this same topic has been beat to oblivion many times.

 

[shredhog65]

For all the newly matched ophthalmology residents, take a look at these threads and see what we are up against:

http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=360854
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=327719
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=178529

Very scary.

 

[blazenmadison]

Its not most OD's that we worry about. I realize that most of you are very good at what you do and desire the best outcome for your patients. ODs are an important part of the "eye care" system.

That being said, I know of several ODs that have and will try to perform proceedures they are not trained in and should not be doing. It is because of them that problems arise. Obviously someone is lobbying to have OD surgery put on state legislation bills. Who do you think it is?

BTW - this same topic has been beat to oblivion many times.

I am an optometry student. I can assure you my class of 120, only 1 person has interest in this silly surgical rights issues. Why? because he is from OK. None of us wanted to do surgery, otherwise we would have applied to medical school. OMDs have gone through extensive amounts of training and obstacles, and I would go to an OMD for lasik before going to an OD even with surgical 'training'.

 

[John_Doe]

New Mexico scores early victory in Surgery by Surgeons fight
Thanks to the New Mexico Academy of Ophthalmology, the New Mexico State Medical Society and your generous support of the Academy’s Surgery by Surgeons campaign, a bill that would have authorized optometrists to perform a wide range of scalpel and laser surgeries was tabled in the New Mexico legislature last week. But the optometric lobby is committed to push its O.D. surgery agenda until the legislature adjourns in mid-March. Please continue to support the Surgical Scope Fund.

 

[PDT4CNV]

Where do we draw the line?....topicals....orals....injectables?
I thinks you are unsure of the moral/ethical fabric of ODs. I was trained to AND performed injections while in OD school...
JP

That is something you should not have been doing....particularly if it was on live humans. Which optometry school is this now? And what is your name?

 

[Mirror Form]

That is something you should not have been doing....particularly if it was on live humans. Which optometry school is this now? And what is your name?

And was he talking about IM/IV injections or intravit injections?

 

[eyerepairman]

I am an optometry student. I can assure you my class of 120, only 1 person has interest in this silly surgical rights issues. Why? because he is from OK. None of us wanted to do surgery, otherwise we would have applied to medical school. OMDs have gone through extensive amounts of training and obstacles, and I would go to an OMD for lasik before going to an OD even with surgical 'training'.

Then you should do demonstrate that you have the highest ethical standard, i.e. you should contact New Mexico legislators and state that you, as an optometry student, oppose the bill to allow optometrist to operate.

Silence is betrayal of mankind.

 

[IndianaOD]

Ok, this post may sound anti-Ophthalmology but is not intended to. Optometrists have more hands on formal training with a slit lamp and binocular indirect. I have frequently worked with ophthalmology residents and I have to tell you sometimes the lack of knowledge was frightening. Also, you may find out that ODs have more ocular pharmacology training than OMDs. As far as "surgery" I think you have to qualify different levels.
What most ODs are fighting for is minimally invasive. PRP, YAG, PIs, SLT come on. All those require are proficiency with a slit-lamp or BIO. That stuff is insanely easy to learn and perform. Several good OMDs have admitted so. As far as LASIK goes or LASEK, most ODs aren't interested, and even if they were the newer lasers do all the work; even creating the flap. Heck, a lot of the optics involved in those lasers and higher-order abberations was developed at optometry schools. Remember, ODs get a lot of optics training. I do believe an OD should be specifically residency trained for a year to do the non-invasive laser surgeries. Intraocular injections aren't rocket science either. Tatoo artists and beauticians can do more invasive procedures than ODs. If problems arise, refer to an OMD specialist like 90% of OMDs do.

I also don't really believe in "general OMDs", only subspecialists. With the invasive surgeries that 99.9% of ODs will never want like strab, trabs, retina, and cataracts only "specialist" OMDs who do these evey day should do them. Please for everyones sake, I hope you understand the training of ODs and that a lot of them have 5 years of education with optional residencies as I do. The good OMDs feel less pressure from ODs because they work with them. Deep down I think a lot of OMD residents would understand the value of going through OD school then 3 years of surgical residency to become an ophthalmologist and learn about the eye from day one. Thanks for your time and good luck in your education and training!

And no I don't want to do invasive surgery or lasers. Though should have the option if I wanted to. I love offering care than OMDs never learned or care about and I greatly respect the good surgeons out there.

 

[PDT4CNV]

Ok, this post may sound anti-Ophthalmology but is not intended to. Optometrists have more hands on formal training with a slit lamp and binocular indirect. I have frequently worked with ophthalmology residents and I have to tell you sometimes the lack of knowledge was frightening. Also, you may find out that ODs have more ocular pharmacology training than OMDs. As far as "surgery" I think you have to qualify different levels.
What most ODs are fighting for is minimally invasive. PRP, YAG, PIs, SLT come on. All those require are proficiency with a slit-lamp or BIO. That stuff is insanely easy to learn and perform. Several good OMDs have admitted so. As far as LASIK goes or LASEK, most ODs aren't interested, and even if they were the newer lasers do all the work; even creating the flap. Heck, a lot of the optics involved in those lasers and higher-order abberations was developed at optometry schools. Remember, ODs get a lot of optics training. I do believe an OD should be specifically residency trained for a year to do the non-invasive laser surgeries. Intraocular injections aren't rocket science either. Tatoo artists and beauticians can do more invasive procedures than ODs. If problems arise, refer to an OMD specialist like 90% of OMDs do.

I also don't really believe in "general OMDs", only subspecialists. With the invasive surgeries that 99.9% of ODs will never want like strab, trabs, retina, and cataracts only "specialist" OMDs who do these evey day should do them. Please for everyones sake, I hope you understand the training of ODs and that a lot of them have 5 years of education with optional residencies as I do. The good OMDs feel less pressure from ODs because they work with them. Deep down I think a lot of OMD residents would understand the value of going through OD school then 3 years of surgical residency to become an ophthalmologist and learn about the eye from day one. Thanks for your time and good luck in your education and training!

And no I don't want to do invasive surgery or lasers. Though should have the option if I wanted to. I love offering care than OMDs never learned or care about and I greatly respect the good surgeons out there.

.

Pretty much none of what you said is accurate. You reflect how little you know about physician training. Your ideas about the nature of the training and the skill required to do ophthalmic procedures are wrong. Your attempt to belittle ophthalmology in comparison to optometry is transparent. Perhaps comments like those would have a more favorable response in the optometry forum.

 

[JR]

I've wasted plenty of time and effort answering ignorant posts like yours over the years. I've stopped, it's no use. PDT pretty much summarized things beautifully. I'll just add that I'll be the first one to testify against you in the court of law when you laser the fovea with you "easy to learn PRP", create an open globe with "refractive lasers that do all the work", etc.,etc. One of the few instances I thank God for our litigous society.

Ok, this post may sound anti-Ophthalmology but is not intended to. Optometrists have more hands on formal training with a slit lamp and binocular indirect. I have frequently worked with ophthalmology residents and I have to tell you sometimes the lack of knowledge was frightening. Also, you may find out that ODs have more ocular pharmacology training than OMDs. As far as "surgery" I think you have to qualify different levels.
What most ODs are fighting for is minimally invasive. PRP, YAG, PIs, SLT come on. All those require are proficiency with a slit-lamp or BIO. That stuff is insanely easy to learn and perform. Several good OMDs have admitted so. As far as LASIK goes or LASEK, most ODs aren't interested, and even if they were the newer lasers do all the work; even creating the flap. Heck, a lot of the optics involved in those lasers and higher-order abberations was developed at optometry schools. Remember, ODs get a lot of optics training. I do believe an OD should be specifically residency trained for a year to do the non-invasive laser surgeries. Intraocular injections aren't rocket science either. Tatoo artists and beauticians can do more invasive procedures than ODs. If problems arise, refer to an OMD specialist like 90% of OMDs do.

I also don't really believe in "general OMDs", only subspecialists. With the invasive surgeries that 99.9% of ODs will never want like strab, trabs, retina, and cataracts only "specialist" OMDs who do these evey day should do them. Please for everyones sake, I hope you understand the training of ODs and that a lot of them have 5 years of education with optional residencies as I do. The good OMDs feel less pressure from ODs because they work with them. Deep down I think a lot of OMD residents would understand the value of going through OD school then 3 years of surgical residency to become an ophthalmologist and learn about the eye from day one. Thanks for your time and good luck in your education and training!

And no I don't want to do invasive surgery or lasers. Though should have the option if I wanted to. I love offering care than OMDs never learned or care about and I greatly respect the good surgeons out there.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

To steer away from this pointless bickering, there's new info from NM.

A new company has just taken over administration of Medicare, and they have changed things a tad. The following surgical codes will no longer reimburse to ODs.

Superficial FB removal (4 different codes based on w/ or w/o slit lamp and corneal vs. conjunctival), pterygium removal, goniotomy, chalazion excision, lid biopsy, lesion excision, cyst drainage, sunconj. injections, punctal plugs, dilation of lacrimal punctum, and probing nasolacrimal duct.

Now I bolded two or those for a reason. The non-bolded procedures are typically outside of optometric scope anyway. The two bolded ones, however, are usually well within OD scope.

 

[IndianaOD]

HaHa, you are defensive because its true. What does med school teach you about eye-care? Patients get horrible eye care from ER docs and general MDs. 1 week of training? Maybe you guys dump sulfacetamide on everything like they do. Just because general surgeons slap you around and tell you that you aren't real surgeons. I guess you have to redirect your anger at Optometry.

If we are uneducated then why should an OMD be allowed to refract or fit contact lenses. You basically have no training. This is evident from the high percentage of spec remakes that I seem from OMDs. Heck a first year OMD resident doesn't know anything about eyes. I've been in case conferences with both professions and am very familiar with your schooling and education.

What are your motivations to become OMDs? I'm only letting you know the truth, otherwise you will be embarased like some OMDs who attack ODs. Legislators are getting tired of the rhetoric so be careful.

P.S. I'll put my undergrad Pre-Med schooling and GPA up against any of you. I have 5 years of eye-specific education. If you are a generalist you have 3. Anything else. I love working with educated OMDs who respect and work with ODs. They are the most successful. Please don't be one of the others.

 

[speyeder]

HaHa, you are defensive because its true. What does med school teach you about eye-care? Patients get horrible eye care from ER docs and general MDs. 1 week of training? Maybe you guys dump sulfacetamide on everything like they do. Just because general surgeons slap you around and tell you that you aren't real surgeons. I guess you have to redirect your anger at Optometry.

If we are uneducated then why should an OMD be allowed to refract or fit contact lenses. You basically have no training. This is evident from the high percentage of spec remakes that I seem from OMDs. Heck a first year OMD resident doesn't know anything about eyes. I've been in case conferences with both professions and am very familiar with your schooling and education.

What are your motivations to become OMDs? I'm only letting you know the truth, otherwise you will be embarased like some OMDs who attack ODs. Legislators are getting tired of the rhetoric so be careful.

P.S. I'll put my undergrad Pre-Med schooling and GPA up against any of you. I have 5 years of eye-specific education. If you are a generalist you have 3. Anything else. I love working with educated OMDs who respect and work with ODs. They are the most successful. Please don't be one of the others.

Take your trolling elsewhere.

 

[I Surgeon]

HaHa, you are defensive because its true. What does med school teach you about eye-care? Patients get horrible eye care from ER docs and general MDs. 1 week of training? Maybe you guys dump sulfacetamide on everything like they do. Just because general surgeons slap you around and tell you that you aren't real surgeons. I guess you have to redirect your anger at Optometry.

If we are uneducated then why should an OMD be allowed to refract or fit contact lenses. You basically have no training. This is evident from the high percentage of spec remakes that I seem from OMDs. Heck a first year OMD resident doesn't know anything about eyes. I've been in case conferences with both professions and am very familiar with your schooling and education.

What are your motivations to become OMDs? I'm only letting you know the truth, otherwise you will be embarased like some OMDs who attack ODs. Legislators are getting tired of the rhetoric so be careful.

P.S. I'll put my undergrad Pre-Med schooling and GPA up against any of you. I have 5 years of eye-specific education. If you are a generalist you have 3. Anything else. I love working with educated OMDs who respect and work with ODs. They are the most successful. Please don't be one of the others.

You need to worry about defending your own turf...if opticians gain refracting rights..then you would be out of business and Walmart could not even save you.

oh BTW, we learn how to refract in 1 maybe 2 weeks starting ist year of optho training. Tell me this sir or mam. HOW COME IT TAKE YOU 4 YEARS TO LEARN THIS (actually you said it took you 5, you must be a slow learner ). the only person you are embarassing is yourself. You are not competent to perform our procedures and it looks like medicare is finding this out. (see above post)peace out.

with love of course!

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

HaHa, you are defensive because its true. What does med school teach you about eye-care? Patients get horrible eye care from ER docs and general MDs. 1 week of training? Maybe you guys dump sulfacetamide on everything like they do. Just because general surgeons slap you around and tell you that you aren't real surgeons. I guess you have to redirect your anger at Optometry.

If we are uneducated then why should an OMD be allowed to refract or fit contact lenses. You basically have no training. This is evident from the high percentage of spec remakes that I seem from OMDs. Heck a first year OMD resident doesn't know anything about eyes. I've been in case conferences with both professions and am very familiar with your schooling and education.

What are your motivations to become OMDs? I'm only letting you know the truth, otherwise you will be embarased like some OMDs who attack ODs. Legislators are getting tired of the rhetoric so be careful.

P.S. I'll put my undergrad Pre-Med schooling and GPA up against any of you. I have 5 years of eye-specific education. If you are a generalist you have 3. Anything else. I love working with educated OMDs who respect and work with ODs. They are the most successful. Please don't be one of the others.

I've read your posts on ODWire and normally you seem a reasonable sort of guy, please don't come here just to start trouble. Those of us here who are tired of OD/MD fighting would greatly appreciate it.

You need to worry about defending your own turf...if opticians gain refracting rights..then you would be out of business and Walmart could not even save you.

oh BTW, we learn how to refract in 1 maybe 2 weeks starting ist year of optho training. Tell me this sir or mam. HOW COME IT TAKE YOU 4 YEARS TO LEARN THIS (actually you said it took you 5, you must be a slow learner ). the only person you are embarassing is yourself. You are not competent to perform our procedures and it looks like medicare is finding this out. (see above post)peace out.

with love of course!

Way to take the high ground there.

 

[IndianaOD]

You have your wish. Continue patting your own backs. If opticians learn to refract it will not only be our jobs at steak. Where will all the ODs go, yup after your jobs.

I don't come here to create trouble, though it is interesting how naive some are. Funny how OMDs treat ODs like gold face to face since most of their income comes from referrals, but talk trash in the shadows. Go on thinking you are "holier than thou" but we all learn the same info, some just take the direct route. Don't speak too loudly about medicare, it only occured because an OMD was on the panel playing politics. Once the reibursements for cataract surgery and others keep coming down, you'll be rethinking your position. End of trolling or whatever you call it. There is a reason the most succesful surgeons around me are OD, MDs they know how good things can be if you aren't always trashing your source of food.

 

[stevemc1]

I've wasted plenty of time and effort answering ignorant posts like yours over the years. I've stopped, it's no use. PDT pretty much summarized things beautifully. I'll just add that I'll be the first one to testify against you in the court of law when you laser the fovea with you "easy to learn PRP", create an open globe with "refractive lasers that do all the work", etc.,etc. One of the few instances I thank God for our leitginous society.

I am an Optometrist and have the utmost respect for the profession of Ophthalmology. IMO, your skill level and training is as high or higher than any profession in the entire world. Like others have said, the VAST majority of Optometrists do not want invasive scalpel surgery rights. Most don't want lasers. Almost all want superficial non invasive surgical privilges (FB removal, lacrimal probing and plugging) as well as therapeutics for the treatment of many acute ocular conditions ( conjunctivitis, keratitis, uveitis), and glaucoma.

Minor surgical procedures, topical eye drops, and a select few orals (antibiotics mainly) are well within our scope of training, and frankly the public benefits from being able to receive primary care from Optometrists. All other invasive procedures should remain in the realm of Ophthalmology. I WOULD NOT ALLOW AN OD TO COME AT MY EYE WITH A SCALPEL!

That being said, be careful with your wish, even though somewhat limited, for a litigous society. What I'm about to say is not meant to be a threat. But if my livlihood becomes threatened because of some BS political medical agenda and monopolistic desires, I promise you I will go to law school and specialize in sueing Ophthalmologists.

Can we come to some kind of an understanding where we can mutually coexist for the benefit of our patients?

 

[rubensan]

What most ODs are fighting for is minimally invasive. PRP, YAG, PIs, SLT come on. All those require are proficiency with a slit-lamp or BIO. That stuff is insanely easy to learn and perform.

"Surgery by Surgeons." YAG, PI, PRP, SLT, Focal are laser surgical procedures. FB removal is a minor surgical procedure. Injection of Lucentis is a minor surgical procodeure. This is how the AAO has stood its ground and I will continue to contribute PAC $ to maintain this position.

 

[GuP]

 

[stevemc1]

"Surgery by Surgeons." YAG, PI, PRP, SLT, Focal are laser surgical procedures. FB removal is a minor surgical procedure. Injection of Lucentis is a minor surgical procodeure. This is how the AAO has stood its ground and I will continue to contribute PACT $ to maintain this position.

Does your PAC go after aestheticians and tattoo artists as well? Or do they just go after those they feel are in competition with for the health care dollar?

 

[rubensan]

let's cut the BS. this is and always has been about $...or "livlihood" as you like to put it.

Does your PAC go after aestheticians and tattoo artists as well? Or do they just go after those they feel are in competition with for the health care dollar?

 

[stevemc1]

c

 

[stevemc1]

let's cut the BS. this is and always has been about $...or "livlihood" as you like to put it.

I respect your honesty, it's refreshing. Curious, do you have a feel for how much money it costs Ophthalmology because ODs are doing minor medical procedures?

 

[JR]

I hope you learn how to spell ophthalmology before you start .

 

[rubensan]

i don't know, but i am not about to risk my livlihood to find out. look, you sound like a reasonable person, but the fact of the matter is your profession started this whole bru-ha-ha. now, i am intelligent enough to realize that the handful of agressive ODs in OK and NM don't represent an entire profession. in fact, outside of this forum i have never met an optometrist who wants more than the right to prescribe xalatan and cosopt. but that's not what the OK, NM and CA (though tabled for now) bills are pushing for and i know you are smart enough to realize this. if we can agree that topical gtts are rights that would benefit both professions to share (and i, like most ophthalmologists are for this), than we could put this whole issue behind us. but no, those agressive few have forced the ophthalmology community to draw lines and set boundries like "surgery by surgeons" and calling lasers "laser surgeries." as idealistic as your posts sound, there will always be that group of optometrists that feel entitled to do surgery, that cozy up to politicians and run for congressional seats to push this agenda. therefore, there will always be ophthalmologists that will react against this and opose this agenda every "pain staking and beating the dead horse to death" step of the way. the ball is in the optometrists' court, not ours.

I respect your honesty, it's refreshing. Curious, do you have a feel for how much money it costs Opthalmology because ODs are doing minor medical procedures?

 

[rubensan]

and GuP, as much as I like you, this is NOT beating a dead horse to death. it is very relevant to the profession that you are working SO HARD to match into. we have to stand our ground on this.

 

[GuP]

and GuP, as much as I like you, this is NOT beating a dead horse to death. it is very relevant to the profession that you are working SO HARD to match into. we have to stand our ground on this.

I meant beating a dead horse in response to explaining (or even defending) yet over and over and over what the phrase "surgery by surgeons" means.

 

[GuP]

You have your wish. Continue patting your own backs. If opticians learn to refract it will not only be our jobs at steak. Where will all the ODs go, yup after your jobs.

I don't come here to create trouble, though it is interesting how naive some are. Funny how OMDs treat ODs like gold face to face since most of their income comes from referrals, but talk trash in the shadows. Go on thinking you are "holier than thou" but we all learn the same info, some just take the direct route. Don't speak too loudly about medicare, it only occured because an OMD was on the panel playing politics. Once the reibursements for cataract surgery and others keep coming down, you'll be rethinking your position. End of trolling or whatever you call it. There is a reason the most succesful surgeons around me are OD, MDs they know how good things can be if you aren't always trashing your source of food.

I don't understand why you keep refering to MD ophthalmologists as OMDs. OMD is a made up name that is a slight to ophthalmologists and I don't see any degrees being handed out that say OMD.

So since ODs are loosing ground to opticians in Walmart, it is reasonable to assume that ODs will successfuly invade over ophthalmologists' territory.

Where do you live again? It must not be USA b/c last I cheked ODs couldn't do eye surgeries, much less be successful at them.

 

[I Surgeon]

I've read your posts on ODWire and normally you seem a reasonable sort of guy, please don't come here just to start trouble. Those of us here who are tired of OD/MD fighting would greatly appreciate it.



Way to take the high ground there.

VA Hopeful Dr,

I really don't care what you think. I believe we have taken the high ground enough and hence with have optometrists doing surgery in Oklahoma. You need to figure out what side your on .

 

[exmike]

thats obviously not a horse, look at the tail

 

[stevemc1]

i don't know, but i am not about to risk my livlihood to find out. look, you sound like a reasonable person, but the fact of the matter is your profession started this whole bru-ha-ha..

It's been an ugly battle for some time now. I don't think it's an accurate statement that MY profession started this thing. I've read past anecdotal statements form MDs through the years describing how stupid ODs are. But that's irrelevant, or it should be. The issues should be debated solely along patient health care concerns and safety protections. If you can prove that ODs doing minor medical procedures is a health care concern, I would gracefully bow out. The fact is no one can accurately and truthfully make that statement. I do understand your desire to protect your livlihood, but I'm pretty confident there's plenty to go around. All Ophthalmologists (hey I got the spelling right ) I know are doing extremely well financially, as they rightfully deserve.

Now...back to my spelling class.

Oh, one last thing, I agree with your statements on scope limitations, within reason. Way too many resources are spent on this battle, and I'm sure there are tons of issues more deserving that we could focus our energy and dollars on.

 

[GuP]

It's been an ugly battle for some time now. I don't think it's an accurate statement that MY profession started this thing. I've read past anecdotal statements form MDs through the years describing how stupid ODs are. But that's irrelevant, or it should be. The issues should be debated solely along patient health care concerns and safety protections. If you can prove that ODs doing minor medical procedures is a health care concern, I would gracefully bow out. The fact is no one can accurately and truthfully make that statement. I do understand your desire to protect your livlihood, but I'm pretty confident there's plenty to go around. All Ophthalmologists (hey I got the spelling right ) I know are doing extremely well financially, as they rightfully deserve.

Now...back to my spelling class.

Oh, one last thing, I agree with your statements on scope limitations, within reason. Way too many resources are spent on this battle, and I'm sure there are tons of issues more deserving that we could focus our energy and dollars on.

The fact is that ODs are not trained to do surgery and therefore they shouldn't be doing it. It is obvious that it is a health care concern. A FP can potentially drill a burr hole to relieve high ICP - it is a relatively "simple" procedure BUT you don't see FPs going around drilling holes b/c they are not trained to do so and thus are not the best candidates to perform the procedure. Now, one can look at this and say ophthamologists are only keeping ODs out of the surgical realm to hog the $$ - This may be true and it may be the motivation of some ophthos but, regardless of the monetary gains, having OD's perform surgery is extremely risky for the patient. Just b/c one feels competent does not mean that they are qualified. In the end it all boils down to the previously mentioned addage - "SURGERY BY SURGEONS"

 

[stevemc1]

The fact is that ODs are not trained to do surgery and therefore they shouldn't be doing it. It is obvious that it is a health care concern. A FP can potentially drill a burr hole to relieve high ICP - it is a relatively "simple" procedure BUT you don't see FPs going around drilling holes b/c they are not trained to do so and thus are not the best candidates to perform the procedure. Now, one can look at this and say ophthamologists are only keeping ODs out of the surgical realm to hog the $$ - This may be true and it may be the motivation of some ophthos but, regardless of the monetary gains, having OD's perform surgery is extremely risky for the patient. Just b/c one feels competent does not mean that they are qualified. In the end it all boils down to the previously mentioned addage - "SURGERY BY SURGEONS"

OK. So the battles will continue. I'll retreat now and leave the final word to someone else.

 

[PDT4CNV]

Guys.....I'm not hearing anything new. The fact is, the NM issue needs to be resolved. The bill needs to be opposed. To practice medicine, the minimum requirement is 4 years of medical school followed by a 1 year internship. My 5 years of pre-ophthalmology medical training qualify me to practice medicine and prescribe medications.

An optometrist is not a physician. And quite obviously, surgeons, regardless of surgical specialty, go through surgical residency programs. And surgical procedures, regardless of the perceived complexity, should be done by surgeons.

If you want to be a dentist, go to dental school, not dental hygenist school.
Lawyers go to law school, not law clerk school. Vets go to vetrinary school...

It is very simple.

Optometry is a good profession. But optometry school makes you an optometrist. Not a physician. Not a surgeon. This goes for nurses, CRNA's, RNPs, psychologists, PA's, pharmacists....etc. A 1st year Ophthalmology resident sees more patients and gains more experience in 6 months than 4 years of optometry school. None of the above is news either, but it goes to the heart of why the NM bill should be shot down. Ethics, degree, training, knowledge, competence..

 

[Frumps]

Hey PDT4, well said!! I was just about to write something similar.

It's funny...optometrists are so worried that opticians will start refracting. Their argument against this is that optoms recieve more training and are better equiped for this (I agree)...the same reason we think surgery should be performed by MDs. MDs are trained in medical school to prescribe medications as well as recieve training in surgery. It started when I was a MS2 and continued through PGY-1, not just the eight week surgery rotation. My ophthalmology training will NOT be the first time that I have held a scalpel/sutured/injected/etc. Even if optometry decided to have a surgical type residency following optometry school they do not have any type of similar surgery training in optometry school, or if they do I would be worried! I am glad to be entering ophthalmology training and will gladly fight against optoms pushing for any surgical right (laser or scalpel)...and my reasoning is for patient safety, not $$

 

[GuP]

OK. So the battles will continue. I'll retreat now and leave the final word to someone else.

There really isn't a grounds for a battle. It's a few militant ODs that give the profession it's hostile nature as perceived by ophthos. Most of the ODs that I have interacted are disgusted by such bills/laws. Most ODs do not want to perform surgery but the few who think it is their right will continue to push futily for a change.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

VA Hopeful Dr,

I really don't care what you think. I believe we have taken the high ground enough and hence with have optometrists doing surgery in Oklahoma. You need to figure out what side your on .

I know what side I'm on. I'm not convinced ODs should be doing lasers. On the other hand, I think that superficial foreign bodies and punctal plugs are something ODs can (and should be able to) easily handle.

There really isn't a grounds for a battle. It's a few militant ODs that give the profession it's hostile nature as perceived by ophthos. Most of the ODs that I have interacted are disgusted by such bills/laws. Most ODs do not want to perform surgery but the few who think it is their right will continue to push futily for a change.

Trick is, you sometimes get states where the MDs are trying to actually take away some of the rights that most agree the ODs should have. I can't remember which, but in either Washington or Oregon, there is a push by medicine to take away glaucoma management from ODs. Both sides are guilty of militancy.

 

[ophtho1122]

The "only a few agressive optoms want to do surgery" argument holds no water. If the optoms that don't want surgical rights didn't support the PACS that support this cause, then there would be no cash to fight with, and the issue would take care of itself. All optoms that give cash are guilty of supporting this war by giving cash to these PACS.

 

[IndianaOD]

Ok I thought I was done with this thread, but I need to kick the horse a few more times. If you do some decent research you will find that the prescribing patterns of ODs, DDS, podiatrists have been safer and less abusive than the MD status quo. MDs (not Ophth) will dump antibiotics on all red-eyes... be viral, allergic, iritis. I don't see anyone bashing DDS and Podiatry on their even larger medical and surgical abilities. DDS use anesthesia for God's sake. It boils down to strait $$ as the above doc mentioned. Just don't stand behind the patient safety issue, its bogus. ODs have never created more problems than Ophthalmologists with their increased scope. The OK ODs have lower complication rates than MDs. The stats are out there, look them up.

Oh and if opticians can do stand alone refractions there is a lot of pathology that will be missed and not treated by ophthalmologists. I don't relate to commercial walmart optometry, that's not my thing. I'm really not sure why other corporate entities don't buy a visx laser and start raking in the dough. Again I don't really care about laser privledges. You will find most all ODs don't want to use a scalpel. I turned down med-school because that isn't what I wanted to do. I wouldn't mind injectables but that's it. Tatoo artists can do that with NO education. How about them dentists again doing as more or more invasive surgery than most of you.

 

[VA Hopeful Dr]

The "only a few agressive optoms want to do surgery" argument holds no water. If the optoms that don't want surgical rights didn't support the PACS that support this cause, then there would be no cash to fight with, and the issue would take care of itself. All optoms that give cash are guilty of supporting this war by giving cash to these PACS.

That's not true. There are plenty of non-surgical political causes that ODs do, and should, support.

Few years back in my home state the ODs pushed to get a bill passed that made it illegal for non-medical providers to Rx plano contact lenses (mainly the cosmetic lenses).