O.D. should equal Doctor of Optometric Medicine

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

Status
Not open for further replies.

Yes, they probably have a better background to be a neurosurgeon that specializes in lesions that compress the chiasm too. This statment makes it difficult for me to take anything you say too seriously.

Also, I have big problems with some of the above listed "primary care " eye tasks.

Ordering CT/MRI - how many of these do you order in your training? Some comprehensive ophthalmologists worry about ordering MRI because they may not order the correct series or may not be comfortable reading it themselves. Many community radiologists struggle at reading these. If you are not as good as they are, you are waiting time and money and more importantly may hurt patients.

Glaucoma care: I have observed some ODs that can handle some of this. However, a recent OD referral from a doc just out of training to our practice regarding a patient with worsening visual fields over the past year made me wonder. The referral letter even mentioned "I did not perform gonioscopy." What a comical statement given the fact she showed up in chronic angle closure OU with a 20 degrees of visual field left in the right eye. Any MD or OD can miss things. If you cannot do or do not do gonioscopy you have no business treating glaucoma.

Diabetic Retinopathy - Severe diabetic retinopathy is not becoming rarer. There is more diabetes in this country and people with access to healthcare are becoming diagnosed at earlier stages. For many this does little for prognosis. Overall, it has added to the number labeled with the diagnosis "diabetes" - some with blood sugars of 130 on no meds. Anything beyond background diabetic retinopathy does not belong in an OD office.

Amblyopia/Strabismus - A recent discussion on this board on how to prescribe glasses for various refractive errors by a pre-od member forces me to place this on the list. The various answers (and there were plenty) make me feel this must not be taught well in certain curriculums. If you cannot give answers that make sense to a pediatric eye expert, you should not be treating this.

New Flashes and floaters - For many reasons...

I really would rather not enter this argument again, but this post shows a vast ignorance of OD training. Your glaucoma story is an anecdote and proves nothing. I can give you anecdotes about patients who've seen OMDs too, but all it prove is there are dumb OMDs out there just like there dumb ODs.

Optometrists shouldn't care for anything other than background DR? Why not? Just because you say so?

And again, I still don't understand the lack of outrage from OMDs about primary care docs, and PAs and NPS for that matter, treating all red eyes with sulfacetamide. If you guys want to spout off about how ODs shouldn't be dealing with glaucoma or diabetes or amblyopia or flashes/floaters, how about you get your own house in order first. Then we'll talk.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Amblyopia/Strabismus - A recent discussion on this board on how to prescribe glasses for various refractive errors by a pre-od member forces me to place this on the list. The various answers (and there were plenty) make me feel this must not be taught well in certain curriculums. If you cannot give answers that make sense to a pediatric eye expert, you should not be treating this.


I'll just mention that regarding prescribing glasses, if you were to enlist the opinions of multiple pediatric eye experts, it is unlikely they would give a unanimous reply too.

That doesn't suggest pediatric eye experts should not be prescribing glasses.
 
I'll just mention that regarding prescribing glasses, if you were to enlist the opinions of multiple pediatric eye experts, it is unlikely they would give a unanimous reply too.

That doesn't suggest pediatric eye experts should not be prescribing glasses.

Good point. I forgot to mention that one. I was curious just which "pediatric eye expert's" opinion we should all use to prescribe treatments for amblyopes. Maybe there really IS only one way to skin a cat.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Good point. I forgot to mention that one. I was curious just which "pediatric eye expert's" opinion we should all use to prescribe treatments for amblyopes. Maybe there really IS only one way to skin a cat.

Many "pediatric eye experts" believe that spectacle correction is never needed in a child who does not have any amblyogenic factors. I think you would find that many ODs (and many parents of these children as well) would beg to differ.

The story about the glaucoma referral means little, if anything. There are times when I will on occasion make a referral and I will specifically mention that I did not perform certain tests, usually for one of two reasons:

a) I know that the specialist will just repeat it and it makes little sense to put the patient through it twice, particularly if it's an unpleasant test like goniscopy

b) by pointing out to the specialist that I did not perform (and therefore bill for) gonioscopy, or extended ophthalmoscopy, or a threshold visual field, I'm pointing out that the specialist is free to BILL the 3rd party carrier for it. Often times 3rd party payors won't pay for more than one of these procedures within a certain amount of time. Perhaps in the future, I'll just perform and bill for these tests and send over copies of the results, and let the specialist deal with the denied claims if they attempt to perform and submit. ;)

I never order any imaging and then manage the patient myself. On occasion, I will order it so that the specialist has it when the patient shows up to their office because there is little point in the patient showing up and going "Ok, we need to order an MRI." That's pretty much a waste of everyone's time. And no, I've never had anyone tell me I ordered the "wrong series."
 
Primary eye care would be different than primary medical care as we are already specialized. Ken, I don't even think you know what you are looking for.

.

Because I do not believe that it even exists. It's a made up term that gets thrown around alot by optometry students and the optometry colleges but there really is no such thing. It's sort of taken on a vague definition of "anything that isn't "surgical" but there are certainly lots of non surgical procedures that are nowhere close to being classified as "primary care."
 

Yes, they probably have a better background to be a neurosurgeon that specializes in lesions that compress the chiasm too. This statment makes it difficult for me to take anything you say too seriously.

Also, I have big problems with some of the above listed "primary care " eye tasks.

Ordering CT/MRI - how many of these do you order in your training? Some comprehensive ophthalmologists worry about ordering MRI because they may not order the correct series or may not be comfortable reading it themselves. Many community radiologists struggle at reading these. If you are not as good as they are, you are waiting time and money and more importantly may hurt patients.

Glaucoma care: I have observed some ODs that can handle some of this. However, a recent OD referral from a doc just out of training to our practice regarding a patient with worsening visual fields over the past year made me wonder. The referral letter even mentioned "I did not perform gonioscopy." What a comical statement given the fact she showed up in chronic angle closure OU with a 20 degrees of visual field left in the right eye. Any MD or OD can miss things. If you cannot do or do not do gonioscopy you have no business treating glaucoma.

Diabetic Retinopathy - Severe diabetic retinopathy is not becoming rarer. There is more diabetes in this country and people with access to healthcare are becoming diagnosed at earlier stages. For many this does little for prognosis. Overall, it has added to the number labeled with the diagnosis "diabetes" - some with blood sugars of 130 on no meds. Anything beyond background diabetic retinopathy does not belong in an OD office.

Amblyopia/Strabismus - A recent discussion on this board on how to prescribe glasses for various refractive errors by a pre-od member forces me to place this on the list. The various answers (and there were plenty) make me feel this must not be taught well in certain curriculums. If you cannot give answers that make sense to a pediatric eye expert, you should not be treating this.

New Flashes and floaters - For many reasons...


I'm just going to say that I find 200UL's posts in this thread eminently reasonable (if not necessarily precise in every detail). I personally haven't found anything he has said to be offensive. All his positions are basically free of insult and ad hominems (unlike some other contributors here).


My take on his position of ODs, is that we're qualified at the "Wal-Mart" level of optometry, and hence, are entitled only to the scope earned/practiced by those who work in that environment. This level of "optometry" isn't practiced by everyone, but it may be viewed as a lowest-common-denominator. As long as there is a population of ODs that practice at this level, his "criticisms" of what we should/should not be doing is a justifiable position. For instance, I can't imagine a WM OD doing vision therapy. That said, not all ODs are working in WM, and some do have advanced clinical skills.


Anyhoos - I look forward to your contributions to this forum.
 
Last edited:
And again, I still don't understand the lack of outrage from OMDs about primary care docs, and PAs and NPS for that matter, treating all red eyes with sulfacetamide. If you guys want to spout off about how ODs shouldn't be dealing with glaucoma or diabetes or amblyopia or flashes/floaters, how about you get your own house in order first. Then we'll talk.

Anecdotal, I know, but I just spent 2 weeks rotating through with 5 different FPs. Each one saw at least one red eye that could benefit from Abx (bacterial or an abrasion) and each one wrote for a fluoroquinolone.

Just saying.
 
I'm sorry, but you are clueless. I could start listing errors from OMDs but that isn't productive. I have probably ordered over 20 MRIs/CTs over the last year. I am a residency/fellowship trained OD. I don't know where you work, but radiologists always write up the reports no matter who orders them. As far as amblyopia there are very few OMDs who see more that I do. This would only be pediatric OMDs.

Diabetic retinopathy...please! Do you read the studies? You have a secret lens that lets you see hemes that I cant?

Get over yourself, you clearly have no idea how ODs are trained.

I'm sorry, but this is the kind of stuff that makes me shake my head.

I'll put your 3 years of eye training vs. my 5 any day. Should OMDs be allowed to refract? No joke, one of my VA rotations would not accept OMD refractions because the remakes were so high. If its so easy why isn't it done right.

Ok, I'm done with this thread. As usual if you are going to state things bring the facts.


Yes, they probably have a better background to be a neurosurgeon that specializes in lesions that compress the chiasm too. This statment makes it difficult for me to take anything you say too seriously.

Also, I have big problems with some of the above listed "primary care " eye tasks.

Ordering CT/MRI - how many of these do you order in your training? Some comprehensive ophthalmologists worry about ordering MRI because they may not order the correct series or may not be comfortable reading it themselves. Many community radiologists struggle at reading these. If you are not as good as they are, you are waiting time and money and more importantly may hurt patients.

Glaucoma care: I have observed some ODs that can handle some of this. However, a recent OD referral from a doc just out of training to our practice regarding a patient with worsening visual fields over the past year made me wonder. The referral letter even mentioned "I did not perform gonioscopy." What a comical statement given the fact she showed up in chronic angle closure OU with a 20 degrees of visual field left in the right eye. Any MD or OD can miss things. If you cannot do or do not do gonioscopy you have no business treating glaucoma.

Diabetic Retinopathy - Severe diabetic retinopathy is not becoming rarer. There is more diabetes in this country and people with access to healthcare are becoming diagnosed at earlier stages. For many this does little for prognosis. Overall, it has added to the number labeled with the diagnosis "diabetes" - some with blood sugars of 130 on no meds. Anything beyond background diabetic retinopathy does not belong in an OD office.

Amblyopia/Strabismus - A recent discussion on this board on how to prescribe glasses for various refractive errors by a pre-od member forces me to place this on the list. The various answers (and there were plenty) make me feel this must not be taught well in certain curriculums. If you cannot give answers that make sense to a pediatric eye expert, you should not be treating this.

New Flashes and floaters - For many reasons...
 
No one is doubting your skill Indy.

But think about those ODs in WM who refer out everything. EVERYTHING! Like, "I'm in the business of healthy eyes".

Obviously, it isn't fair for others to paint us all in the lowest-common-denominator, but that denominator does exist. Whether there should be "tiers" of the way optometry is practiced, is another argument entirely.

I think 200UL is far from the most insulting OMD to ever come across these boards. True, he paints all of optometry as WM optometry, but that's about his only fault. We've definitely heard a lot worse here.

Anyways - I'm not sure what I'm saying here, other than that this has been a disagreement on scope - which is the argument we really ought to be a part of.
 
The various answers (and there were plenty) make me feel this must not be taught well in certain curriculums.


I'll just say that "homogeneity" of patient care isn't a requirement of proper patient care.

When you do cataract surgery, how large are your incisions? 2.2 mm? 2.7 mm? 3.3 mm?

Do you operate at the same clock-hour for every patient, or do you operate along an astigmatic axis?

When you do phaco, do you partition the lens into several pieces before suctioning them out? If so, how many pieces? 4? 8? 10?

JCRS has an "expert's consultation" in every issue of their journal, asking for expert opinions on surgical cases. Everyone contributes a different idea. Does that suggest they should not be performing the surgery?



Anyhoos - you're right that the avg OMD sees more pathology than the avg OD. But as you suggested, some ophths have a hard time reading scans that radiologists should. And not all radiologists are equally competent - does that mean only the very_most competent practitioner in the world should have the right to practice radiology?



For primary eye care, I think the average-trained OD is adequately trained. Will they miss some stuff because they have seen 1/5000th the pathology of an OMD? Possibly, but they'll catch enough to provide a useful service for the vast majority of their patients. They'll further, likely, provide optimal refractions to the same group, something no other group can claim to. And how many individuals in the population require eye "medicine". Yet, how many require refractive correction?



Lastly, we are obviously talking about perceived generalizations. The least-competent ophthalmologist is someone you would never send anyone you know to see. And the most well-trained optometrist perhaps finds more pathology than the average OMD. So in general, arguments can hold, but they do not hold in the specific.
 
I'll put your 3 years of eye training vs. my 5 any day.
This gets brought up a lot I've noticed and frankly it makes no sense to me. Okay yes OD's get 4 years of eye training. Is that ALL eye stuff?? I imagine some of it is basic science. Also book study is not clinical study and OMD's get a lot more clinical study. Granted a residency trained OD does have more clinical experience but lets compare apples to apples. Compare the 4 years of OD school to the 3 of OMD residency.

First in residency we avg about 50-60 hours a week working, how many do OD's do... I am asking b\c I honestly don't know but doubt is more than 40. If that is the case than effectively each OMD year is 1.5 years making 3 years almost 5.

I am not saying here who is better trained at what, overall I am very pro-OD except for the ones who want "real" surgical rights. I just take offense when someone says their training is better than mine b\c technically they did more years of eye related traing.
 
I am not saying here who is better trained at what, overall I am very pro-OD except for the ones who want "real" surgical rights. I just take offense when someone says their training is better than mine b\c technically they did more years of eye related traing.

This thread is rapidly becoming a complete waste of bandwidth. :(

There is little point in debating who's training is "better" because the training emphasizes different areas even though the training is related to the eye in both cases.

That's like saying Tiger Woods' training is better than Wayne Gretzky's even though they both play sports. You can't really compare the two.

Let's summarize: Hopefully we can all agree on this.

1) Ophthalmologists are well trained to do what they do.

2) Optometrists are well trained to do what they do.

3) Some optometrists feel that they are well trained to do things that some ophthalmologists feel that they are not well trained to do. Are they? Maybe, maybe not.

4) If they are not well trained, could they be trained well within the context of a 4 year post graduate program? Yes. Is the current 4 year post graduate program providing that training? Maybe, maybe not.

5) If it's not, should we pursue setting up that training? That's up for discussion.
 

b) by pointing out to the specialist that I did not perform (and therefore bill for) gonioscopy, or extended ophthalmoscopy, or a threshold visual field, I'm pointing out that the specialist is free to BILL the 3rd party carrier for it. Often times 3rd party payors won't pay for more than one of these procedures within a certain amount of time. Perhaps in the future, I'll just perform and bill for these tests and send over copies of the results, and let the specialist deal with the denied claims if they attempt to perform and submit.

Any doctor OD or MD that omits or does gonioscopy on any glaucoma patient or suspect for billing purposes should loose there license. Are you serious? The lady, who is a +2.00 hyperope with a 3+NSC, shows up with angle closure and visual fields (every 2 months for the 6 months) that show amazing progression - she now is legally blind and this did not happen overnight. This is not about billing, this is someone’s mother.

Gonioscopy takes about 30 seconds to perform. I cannot speak for ODs but the standard of care in the MD community would be to do gonioscopy when appropriate - even if you are not getting paid. Many situations call for this to be done more than on a yearly basis.
 
Members don't see this ad :)

b) by pointing out to the specialist that I did not perform (and therefore bill for) gonioscopy, or extended ophthalmoscopy, or a threshold visual field, I'm pointing out that the specialist is free to BILL the 3rd party carrier for it. Often times 3rd party payors won't pay for more than one of these procedures within a certain amount of time. Perhaps in the future, I'll just perform and bill for these tests and send over copies of the results, and let the specialist deal with the denied claims if they attempt to perform and submit.

Any doctor OD or MD that omits or does gonioscopy on any glaucoma patient or suspect for billing purposes should loose there license. Are you serious? The lady, who is a +2.00 hyperope with a 3+NSC, shows up with angle closure and visual fields (every 2 months for the 6 months) that show amazing progression - she now is legally blind and this did not happen overnight. This is not about billing, this is someone’s mother.

Gonioscopy takes about 30 seconds to perform. I cannot speak for ODs but the standard of care in the MD community would be to do gonioscopy when appropriate - even if you are not getting paid. Many situations call for this to be done more than on a yearly basis.

Calm down, squire.

I know what the standard of care is, even if not getting paid.

But in the real world outside the friendly confines of a teaching university, people prefer to get paid. As such, there is little point in me needlessly running up a giant bill on a patient who is not in immediate danger (as much as I like to run up giant bills) when the specialist I'm consulting with is going to do the same thing.

Since I'm asking them for their opinion, I try to allow them to bill for certain tests as a means of maintaining a cordial relationship. I don't think that they would appreciate it if I sent over 5 patients a month all of whom have had their benefits exhausted and they are forced to render an opinion or treatment for the office visit amount of $43.21.
 
I have probably ordered over 20 MRIs/CTs over the last year. I am a residency/fellowship trained OD. I don't know where you work, but radiologists always write up the reports no matter who orders them.

I have spent 1 month in medical school on the neuroradiology service in addition to 1 month during my internship - both a big university hospitals. Every medical student in the US also memorizes coronal and axial neuro anatomy from the tip of the skull to the sacrum. Every US medical student also spends one month on the neurology wards treating stroke patients - reading imaging is a big part of this. One might think this makes the average US medical grad pretty competent to order MRIs, but unless they have additional training in this - I say no.

We have a large neuro-ophthalmology service at my current institution as well. And guess what? The neuro ophthalmologists often find lesions on the scans missed by the radiologists. They even have a regular conference to discuss these - amazing. We frequently get sent images from outside MDs or ODs with the wrong protocols used that are worthless. Clinical history is also key as “vision loss” on the radiology rec is pretty worthless for the radiologists.

The bottom line is a competent physicians can find the lesion without the help of radiology in most cases. The same could be said in NSG or GSurg... Competent physicians give radiologists the clues and there is potential for dialogue between the two. They actually can tell them what studies should be done (orbits or brain or brain stem or neck or DWI or fat suppressed or flair or ASL +/- gad or MRA or MRV or.... ). Not just a “read this” or "write up the report" as you put it."

CT for trauma - OK. But I doubt the average OD wants to be ordering MRI. You admit you order less than 20 per year??? Our service reviews about 20 scans in a 2 day period. While your local hospital may like it (that $billing$ thing again), you may get yourself into situations that are not good for anyone. Please just know your limits. Again, I at least think about mine.
 
So 200, what is your bottom line then?

Take away everything except for refraction (but permit refraction only in certain cases) for optometrists?

If that's what you strongly believe, I suggest you lobby for your position. Coming on here and telling competent ODs (I assume the vocal ones here are more competent than average) that they shouldn't do squat doesn't really get you very far.
 
And guess what? The neuro ophthalmologists often find lesions on the scans missed by the radiologists. They even have a regular conference to discuss these - amazing. We frequently get sent images from outside MDs or ODs with the wrong protocols used that are worthless.

So I assume you think radiologists have no business reading MRIs then? I also assume you think MDs shouldn't be allowed to order them? Based on what you've written above, are those correct assumptions? I mean, you've implied ODs shouldn't be allowed to treat glaucoma because one OD you know didn't do gonio once.
 
Obviously 200UL is either showing the proverbial "MD bias" that so rampantly infects "some" ophthalmology residents or he/she really has no clue whatsoever about OD capabilities in treating glaucoma or any eye disease for that matter. I suspect it is both.

Can you read 200UL? (look at the red print closely):

The Practice of Optometry: National Board of Examiners in Optometry Survey of Optometric Patients
MORT SOROKA, PhD, DAVID KRUMHOLZ, OD, AMY BENNETT, MPA,
and THE NATIONAL BOARD OF EXAMINERS CONDITIONS DOMAIN TASK FORCE

Conclusion. Ocular disease treatment was found to be an integral part of the optometrist’s practice. Prescribing topical
medications, both legend and “over the counter,” was a primary treatment option. The most common medications
prescribed were for glaucoma
, with antibiotics, antiinflammatory, and antiallergy drops making up the remainder in
descending order.

(Optom Vis Sci 2006;83:E625–E636)

The doctors of optometry on this forum are MORE than competent to treat glaucoma and if I had it or ANY of my relatives I would not hesitate to send them to an optometrist. My eye doctor for the last 20 yrs has been------you guessed it........an OPTOMETRIST! lol
Your argument is weak and full of holes. I am not an optometric physician just yet ("student optometry physician" is proudly displayed on my coat) but I will say with conviction that imaging modalities such as CT, MRI, etc...are very high on my interest priorities and I plan to learn as much as I can about them. Also treating eye disease is my MAIN interest followed by refraction, optics, etc......I like all of those actually.


You are living in an ophthalmological eye care fantasy land.
 
"Our service reviews about 20 scans in a 2 day period. While your local hospital may like it (that $billing$ thing again), you may get yourself into situations that are not good for anyone. Please just know your limits. Again, I at least think about mine."----200UL

Preface: OD's are Primary Eye Care Doctors and comparing the amount of "imaging scans" they order to OMD's (eye surgeons) is very flawed logic.

Lets just say that in the future you are "refractive ophthalmologist" practicing in "primary eye care" because you can basically do what you want and you are actually refracting. Do you really think that if you are in the "real world" in a primary eye care practice that your practice is going to review 10 MRI/CT scans a day? So you will have 50 scans a week you will be reviewing-----if you were in a primary eye care practice. I find this very hard to believe.....
 
When I get out into practice, I do not anticipate seeing this many scans per day. However, call me old fashioned, but I would like my doctor or the doctor of my family member to have experience in the things he or she is evaluating or treating. I think the current exposure in my training is valuable, but maybe you are right - perhaps it is a waist of time since it seems you probably do it better than I can.

Give me some examples where an OD should order an MRI. I am sorry, but I doubt that ever in our lifetime, the OD is going to be at first call of NSG or Neuro when it comes to evaluating ocular conditions that call for an MRI. You somehow receive more pharmacology than medical students. Are they also able to pack in more training with stroke patients, demyelinating disease, or mass lesions? Maybe you are right - maybe all medical students should go to OD school. Pardon the sarcasm.

And eyestrain...
The patient deserves that the ordering physician be able to have a dialogue with the reading radiologist. If all ODs in training are gaining experience working with radiology departments, ordering MRI studies, are treating stroke patients, talking to neurologists and neurosurgeons - then maybe they should be ordering all the MRIs in the hospital.

I believe the ordering physician should know exactly what series of images are needed to diagnose the suspected condition properly.

Not all calls are easy - in fact some are very difficult. Maybe in OD world all the diagnoses make sense. The radiologist is only as good as the clinical history. Sorry, headache, belly pain, vision loss do not cut it....
 
The doctors of optometry on this forum are MORE than competent to treat glaucoma and if I had it or ANY of my relatives I would not hesitate to send them to an optometrist. My eye doctor for the last 20 yrs has been------you guessed it........an OPTOMETRIST! lol
Your argument is weak and full of holes. I am not an optometric physician just yet ("student optometry physician" is proudly displayed on my coat) but I will say with conviction that imaging modalities such as CT, MRI, etc...are very high on my interest priorities and I plan to learn as much as I can about them. Also treating eye disease is my MAIN interest followed by refraction, optics, etc......I like all of those actually.

"Student Optometry Physician" is really written on your lab coat? Dude, that's a bit much. Mine simply says "Medical Student". Heck, between the short coat, the bright red name tag, and the hospital ID badge they might as well put a scarlet MS on my chest. Why on Earth can't you use "Optometry Student"?
 
"Our service reviews about 20 scans in a 2 day period. While your local hospital may like it (that $billing$ thing again), you may get yourself into situations that are not good for anyone. Please just know your limits. Again, I at least think about mine."----200UL

Preface: OD's are Primary Eye Care Doctors and comparing the amount of "imaging scans" they order to OMD's (eye surgeons) is very flawed logic.

Lets just say that in the future you are "refractive ophthalmologist" practicing in "primary eye care" because you can basically do what you want and you are actually refracting. Do you really think that if you are in the "real world" in a primary eye care practice that your practice is going to review 10 MRI/CT scans a day? So you will have 50 scans a week you will be reviewing-----if you were in a primary eye care practice. I find this very hard to believe.....

WHAT THE F*CK IS PRIMARY EYE CARE AND WHAT THE F*CK IS A PRIMARY EYE CARE DOCTOR???

MY APOLOGIES IN ADVANCE FOR SAYING THE WORD F*CK, AND I FULLY EXPECT TO BE SENT TO TIMEOUT BY A MODERATOR BUT YOU'RE F*CKING MAKING ME SAY IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

:mad::mad::mad::mad:
 
I usually post in the pharmacy forums, but I accidentally clicked "Optometry" and the title of this thread caught my eye. I didn't read all the posts (so pardon me if I'm repeating what has already been said).

What I have to say is, Why the heck are you interested in TITLES, for crying out loud? If you want to do what MD's are doing, GO TO MEDICAL SCHOOL. And what's more, even if you're Idiot, MD, DO, DPM, DMD, or whatever, you're still an idiot.
 
medicalcpa,

Please go back to the pharmacy forum:D........JUST KIDDING! Nobody here is saying the O.D. degree is not respectable. I think it is cool. The original topic of the thread was the fact that DMD/DDS (Doctor of Dental Medicine), DPM (Doctor of Podiatric Medicine), are independent doctorate level providers that diagnose illnesses and prescribe medicines with autonomy just like OD's (Doctors of Optometry). FuturedoctorOD just thought that maybe it would make sense to add "medicine" to the end of the degree's description. It really is not necessary and "Doctor of Optometry" is fine........

And actually Optometrists, Dentists, and Podiatrists do alot of " what MD's are doing" in their own area of the body included in their scope of practice...Stop sucking off the MD teet! I say! PLEASE!
 
Last edited:
This term "primary eye doctor" is used quite liberally at my optometry school, state organizations, and the AOA.......

an excerp from one of the AOA's pamphlets that I happen to have......

"Doctors of optometry are the nation's largest eye care profession, serving patients in nearly 6,500 communities across the country, where in more than 3,500 of these communities, they are the only primary eye doctors."

Ohio Optometric Association

"the OOA works to ensure that Ohioans have access to the quality, costeffective services of Ohio’s primary eye doctors."



An example of what is part of "primary eye care" by the state optometric association......

"There are two areas in primary eye care where anti-inflammatories
are utilized. The first is pain management, which also falls under the
broader category of analgesics. The second is for the treatment of
inflammatory eye conditions such as episcleritis or scleritis."


KHE , I can pull up enough examples of this to fill a thread for days....lol


 
VA,

"student optometric physician" is on my coat by school dresscode policy. sorry--I misswrote "optometry" instead of "optometric" in my post....anyway----I tried to see if I could have "optometry student" put on one my coats and I was told flat out "no". It is part of the school's philosophy and policy. The DO students at our school have "student physician" on their coats so we have to be able to differentiate ourselves from them.


I have seen quite a number of OD's in Florida go by the Optometric Physician moniker.
 
This term "primary eye doctor" is used quite liberally at my optometry school, state organizations, and the AOA.......

an excerp from one of the AOA's pamphlets that I happen to have......

"Doctors of optometry are the nation's largest eye care profession, serving patients in nearly 6,500 communities across the country, where in more than 3,500 of these communities, they are the only primary eye doctors."

Ohio Optometric Association

"the OOA works to ensure that Ohioans have access to the quality, costeffective services of Ohio’s primary eye doctors."



An example of what is part of "primary eye care" by the state optometric association......

"There are two areas in primary eye care where anti-inflammatories
are utilized. The first is pain management, which also falls under the
broader category of analgesics. The second is for the treatment of
inflammatory eye conditions such as episcleritis or scleritis."


KHE , I can pull up enough examples of this to fill a thread for days....lol



None of those examples define what a "primary eye doctor" is. The only thing you have posted is an example of the term being used in a sentence.

That's no different than the following.

Define the word "grapefruit."
"I ate a grapefruit today."

So I ask again....for the 100th time.....what IS "primary eye care?"
 
Here you go KHE! Although from a more ominous source.....

American Academy of Ophthalmology(The We Wish Optometry Did Not Exist Organization) LMAO

Primary eye care:
provides an entry point for patients to receive refractions and glasses or contact lenses, screenings for asymptomatic eye diseases, diagnosis and treatment of most eye conditions, referral to specialists, and coordination with other aspects of medical care. (Gee this sounds a lot like an OPTOMETRIST!)


Primary Eye Care:
Primary eye care is the provision of appropriate, accessible and affordable care that meets patients' eye care needs in a comprehensive and competent manner. Patients receive primary eye care both as their first contact and as continuing care throughout their lifetimes. Primary eye care services are integrated, so that patients are served from a single focal point for all necessary eye care services and receive quality, efficient eye care, which is coordinated with general health care services. Competent and expert management and decision making is critical to promoting the quality and efficiency of primary eye care.
Primary eye care services consist of the following:

  1. Educating patients about maintenance and promotion of healthy vision;
  2. Performing a comprehensive examination of the visual system;
  3. Screening for eye diseases and conditions affecting vision that may be asymptomatic;
  4. Recognizing ocular manifestations of systemic diseases and systemic effects of ocular medications;
  5. Making a differential diagnosis and definitive diagnosis for any abnormalities that are detected;
  6. Performing refractions;
  7. Fitting and prescribing optical aids such as glasses and contact lenses;
  8. Deciding on a treatment plan and treating patients' eye care needs with appropriate therapies;
  9. Counseling and educating patients about their eye disease conditions;
  10. Recognizing and managing local and systemic effects of drug therapy;
  11. Determining when to triage patients for more specialized care and referring to specialists as needed and appropriate;
  12. Coordinating care with other physicians involved in the patient's overall medical management.
This is the official AAO definition. Hmmmm sounds like an OPTOMETRIST.....LOL
link:
http://one.aao.org/CE/PracticeGuide...aspx?cid=83c61495-b2a6-447e-a9c0-5224d5d7e3a6


Primary Eye Care Physician (American Academy of Ophthalmology Definition)
The key characteristic of a primary eye care physician is that he or she receives and processes all undiagnosed visual signs, symptoms, or concerns that patients bring -*unrestricted by problem origin -- and has the appropriate education and training to manage a large majority of those problems.
Primary eye care should be provided by or supervised by qualified physicians who have the following competencies:

  1. To discover and discern abnormal states from normal;
  2. To diagnose the presence of disease conditions;
  3. To relate general medical conditions and symptoms to possible eye diseases;
  4. To triage and manage effectively or refer for more specialized treatment;
  5. To coordinate with other physicians and health care professionals for meeting general health care needs;
  6. To develop a treatment plan and take care of the large majority of eye care needs encountered in the general population.
Hmmmmmmmm again..sounds like the AAO is defining what is an OPTOMETRIST.....


Cool when I go back to school when my Medical School counterparts ask what I am doing I will refer them to the American Academy of Ophthalmology's definition of an Optometrist er uh I mean a Primary Eye Care Physician-----actually an OPTOMETRIST......lol


Let the optometric self-hate begin!!!! Yipeeeeee!
 
Last edited:
VA,

"student optometric physician" is on my coat by school dresscode policy. sorry--I misswrote "optometry" instead of "optometric" in my post....anyway----I tried to see if I could have "optometry student" put on one my coats and I was told flat out "no". It is part of the school's philosophy and policy. The DO students at our school have "student physician" on their coats so we have to be able to differentiate ourselves from them.


I have seen quite a number of OD's in Florida go by the Optometric Physician moniker.

Yeah, I figured the optometry part was just a typo. I had also assumed it was a school policy - none of us are allowed to customize too much. You're also right that many medical students get Student Doctor/Physician on their coats as well. We've been told we can introduce ourselves this way to patients. Personally, I don't care for this and don't plan to ever use it. The last thing we need is expanding the number of folks with Physician in their title somewhere. Heck, I don't even plan to use that title as an MD unless I have to. I also respect you for trying to go for the other, not often you'd see that kind of thing.

Generally speaking, I've no problem with Optometric Physicians. I'm well aware of the back story behind that and it doesn't worry me in the least. I'm not a huge fan of folks using it when insurance doesn't require it, but to be honest even then its pretty low on my list of things to worry about.
 
When I get out into practice, I do not anticipate seeing this many scans per day. However, call me old fashioned, but I would like my doctor or the doctor of my family member to have experience in the things he or she is evaluating or treating. I think the current exposure in my training is valuable, but maybe you are right - perhaps it is a waist of time since it seems you probably do it better than I can.

Give me some examples where an OD should order an MRI. I am sorry, but I doubt that ever in our lifetime, the OD is going to be at first call of NSG or Neuro when it comes to evaluating ocular conditions that call for an MRI. You somehow receive more pharmacology than medical students. Are they also able to pack in more training with stroke patients, demyelinating disease, or mass lesions? Maybe you are right - maybe all medical students should go to OD school. Pardon the sarcasm.

And eyestrain...
The patient deserves that the ordering physician be able to have a dialogue with the reading radiologist. If all ODs in training are gaining experience working with radiology departments, ordering MRI studies, are treating stroke patients, talking to neurologists and neurosurgeons - then maybe they should be ordering all the MRIs in the hospital.

I believe the ordering physician should know exactly what series of images are needed to diagnose the suspected condition properly.

Not all calls are easy - in fact some are very difficult. Maybe in OD world all the diagnoses make sense. The radiologist is only as good as the clinical history. Sorry, headache, belly pain, vision loss do not cut it....

Wow, I'm starting to smell a Troll! I'm about to get fired up enough to go shut down some OMD threads. Every time I started stating facts over there and punishing the trainees the thread got shut down.

You need to get out of academia and smell the real world. Keep up this attitude and you won't be doing hardly any surgery b/c no OD will send you any patients.

What cases would an OMD order an MRI where an OD wouldn't?

I have ordered them for:
Optic Neuritis
Papilledema
Unexplained Vision loss
Progressive headaches
Sudden onset field defects
Unexplained diplopia
Others I can't recall right now

Once I rule out the scary, then I can determine what else could be going on.

Hate to tell you, but stroke rehab is a strongly growing field for optometry and most OMDs don't believe in the stuff that works.

Seriously, the ped OMDs didn't even check accommodation on HA cases? We used to joke they didn't believe in accommodation.

Honestly there is little use for general OMDs. The only think I refer to them is LASIK and cataract. Otherwise its to Retina or Cornea.

Hey there smart stuff, want to compare IQs and GPAs? I mean that's about as intelligent as this stuff is.
 
In response to the term "optometric physician" argument, it's simply what the fine state of Florida designates their optometrists as. I believe it's printed on their licenses. It isn't some elaborate ploy by NOVA for bettering their philosophy or student respect, it's just what the state says. Those lab coats are silly anyways, it's too f-ing hot here to wear anything but short sleeves.
 
LOL I agree Dr. Schrute it is toooo hot down here.....
 
Here you go KHE! Although from a more ominous source.....

American Academy of Ophthalmology(The We Wish Optometry Did Not Exist Organization) LMAO

Primary eye care:
provides an entry point for patients to receive refractions and glasses or contact lenses, screenings for asymptomatic eye diseases, diagnosis and treatment of most eye conditions, referral to specialists, and coordination with other aspects of medical care. (Gee this sounds a lot like an OPTOMETRIST!)


Primary Eye Care:
Primary eye care is the provision of appropriate, accessible and affordable care that meets patients' eye care needs in a comprehensive and competent manner. Patients receive primary eye care both as their first contact and as continuing care throughout their lifetimes. Primary eye care services are integrated, so that patients are served from a single focal point for all necessary eye care services and receive quality, efficient eye care, which is coordinated with general health care services. Competent and expert management and decision making is critical to promoting the quality and efficiency of primary eye care.
Primary eye care services consist of the following:

  1. Educating patients about maintenance and promotion of healthy vision;
  2. Performing a comprehensive examination of the visual system;
  3. Screening for eye diseases and conditions affecting vision that may be asymptomatic;
  4. Recognizing ocular manifestations of systemic diseases and systemic effects of ocular medications;
  5. Making a differential diagnosis and definitive diagnosis for any abnormalities that are detected;
  6. Performing refractions;
  7. Fitting and prescribing optical aids such as glasses and contact lenses;
  8. Deciding on a treatment plan and treating patients' eye care needs with appropriate therapies;
  9. Counseling and educating patients about their eye disease conditions;
  10. Recognizing and managing local and systemic effects of drug therapy;
  11. Determining when to triage patients for more specialized care and referring to specialists as needed and appropriate;
  12. Coordinating care with other physicians involved in the patient's overall medical management.
This is the official AAO definition. Hmmmm sounds like an OPTOMETRIST.....LOL
link:
http://one.aao.org/CE/PracticeGuide...aspx?cid=83c61495-b2a6-447e-a9c0-5224d5d7e3a6



Let the optometric self-hate begin!!!! Yipeeeeee!

Ok, so now that we have a definition, the question then becomes....do many of the things you are advocating doing, such as YAGs, and PIs, and intravitreal kenalog fall under the definition of primary care? It seems that by your way of thinking, anything that doesn't fall under the category of "surgery requiring some sort of sedation" is "primary care."
 
Well KHE this is where "what is primary care" becomes very gray and there is not much of a "black" or "white". My optometric frame of reference is very limited compared to yours KHE. Based on my own research I feel that optometric primary eye care should be the state of oklahoma's scope of practice for OD's. combined with Tennessee's prescribing scope (any drug deemed necessary for the treatment of ocular disease.)---to me that is the "ideal definition of optometric primary eye care". That still leaves all invasive ocular surgery beyond the PRK, trabs, iridotomies, SLT's, etc....that Oklahoma OD's do in the realm of ophthalmology. For god sakes, family practice doctors can do some invasive "in office" procedures but they are NOT surgeons. Oklahoma's scope of practice in my eyes is the model for the future.

Oklahoma Association of Optometric Physicians

Optometry Scope of Practice

  • Optometric physicians detect, diagnose and treat eye diseases. These diseases include infections (viral and bacterial), ocular allergies and ocular inflammations. They manage and treat diseases of the eye and eyelids. They also manage cataracts, glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy.
  • Optometric physicians treat eye diseases with any indicated systemic and/or topical medications and prescribe supportive pain medications schedule III, IV & V to improve overall health and vision capabilities
  • Optometric physicians treat eye injuries including foreign objects in the eye and eyelid. They routinely treat cysts, chalazia, trichiasis, disorders of the lacrimal system and dry eye.
  • In Oklahoma, optometric physicians utilize laser technology to treat eye conditions with capsulotomies and iridotomies. They provide pre-operative and post-operative treatment for many eye surgeries in coordination with ophthalmologists.
  • Optometric physicians specialize in comprehensive eye examinations with dilation to improve visual disorders through prescriptions for corrective spectacle lenses and contact lenses, this also includes rehabilitative therapy for ocular motor dysfunction (amblyopia, eye coordination & strabismus). Optometric physicians are trained in prescribing specialized adaptive vision aids for subnormal vision, or loss of vision from diseases such as macular degeneration and stroke.
  • Developing and maintaining professional referral relationships with family practitioners, internists, endocrinologists, neurologists, ophthalmologists and other physician specialties to ensure that eye health is maintained in concert with overall physical health and wellness.
http://oaop.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=31

NONE OF THIS MAKES OPTOMETRIC PHYSICIANS IN OKLAHOMA "EYE SURGEONS" (contrary to the Ophthalmology propaganda)

I really believe in my heart that this is what the nationwide optometry scope of practice should be. I am not going to be "PC" about it. If they can do it in Oklahoma then it can be done everywhere else too. I really don't care what organized ophthalmology thinks about this because after I have done my own extensive research of the last 38 years of optometry's growth the conclusion I have come to is that organized ophthalmology---1) does not respect optometry 2) would wipe OD's off the planet if they could and 3) will put its turf protection over patient care (i.e the nonsense of 5 states still not having oral drugs, a couple of states not having glaucoma treatment, and trying to block things like HR 1983 from going through). I am really tired of being P.C. about this stuff.


Let the onslaught of---"you're just a lowly student, you should just go to medical school, why not just close down all the ophthalmology residencies, go refract and be happy, ophthalmologists have 24 years of training (k-12 + 4 yr BS + 1 yr + Ophtho residency), surgery by surgeons, your going to be very unhappy as an optometrist if you think that, you have an inferiority complex, -----------begin! :laugh:
 
Last edited:
Well KHE this is where "what is primary care" becomes very gray and there is not much of a "black" or "white". My optometric frame of reference is very limited compared to yours KHE. Based on my own research I feel that optometric primary eye care should be the state of oklahoma's scope of practice for OD's. combined with Tennessee's prescribing scope (any drug deemed necessary for the treatment of ocular disease.)---to me that is the "ideal definition of optometric primary eye care". That still leaves all invasive ocular surgery beyond the PRK, trabs, iridotomies, SLT's, etc....that Oklahoma OD's do in the realm of ophthalmology. For god sakes, family practice doctors can do some invasive "in office" procedures but they are NOT surgeons. Oklahoma's scope of practice in my eyes is the model for the future.

Oklahoma Association of Optometric Physicians

Optometry Scope of Practice

  • Optometric physicians detect, diagnose and treat eye diseases. These diseases include infections (viral and bacterial), ocular allergies and ocular inflammations. They manage and treat diseases of the eye and eyelids. They also manage cataracts, glaucoma and diabetic retinopathy.
  • Optometric physicians treat eye diseases with any indicated systemic and/or topical medications and prescribe supportive pain medications schedule III, IV & V to improve overall health and vision capabilities
  • Optometric physicians treat eye injuries including foreign objects in the eye and eyelid. They routinely treat cysts, chalazia, trichiasis, disorders of the lacrimal system and dry eye.
  • In Oklahoma, optometric physicians utilize laser technology to treat eye conditions with capsulotomies and iridotomies. They provide pre-operative and post-operative treatment for many eye surgeries in coordination with ophthalmologists.
  • Optometric physicians specialize in comprehensive eye examinations with dilation to improve visual disorders through prescriptions for corrective spectacle lenses and contact lenses, this also includes rehabilitative therapy for ocular motor dysfunction (amblyopia, eye coordination & strabismus). Optometric physicians are trained in prescribing specialized adaptive vision aids for subnormal vision, or loss of vision from diseases such as macular degeneration and stroke.
  • Developing and maintaining professional referral relationships with family practitioners, internists, endocrinologists, neurologists, ophthalmologists and other physician specialties to ensure that eye health is maintained in concert with overall physical health and wellness.
http://oaop.org/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=16&Itemid=31

NONE OF THIS MAKES OPTOMETRIC PHYSICIANS IN OKLAHOMA "EYE SURGEONS" (contrary to the Ophthalmology propaganda)

I really believe in my heart that this is what the nationwide optometry scope of practice should be. I am not going to be "PC" about it. If they can do it in Oklahoma then it can be done everywhere else too. I really don't care what organized ophthalmology thinks about this because after I have done my own extensive research of the last 38 years of optometry's growth the conclusion I have come to is that organized ophthalmology---1) does not respect optometry 2) would wipe OD's off the planet if they could and 3) will put its turf protection over patient care (i.e the nonsense of 5 states still not having oral drugs, a couple of states not having glaucoma treatment, and trying to block things like HR 1983 from going through). I am really tired of being P.C. about this stuff.


Let the onslaught of---"you're just a lowly student, you should just go to medical school, why not just close down all the ophthalmology residencies, go refract and be happy, ophthalmologists have 24 years of training (k-12 + 4 yr BS + 1 yr + Ophtho residency), surgery by surgeons, your going to be very unhappy as an optometrist if you think that, you have an inferiority complex, -----------begin! :laugh:
Nice post. I still disagree with you on most of the topics under discussion here, but you present your argument well here.
 
Well KHE this is where "what is primary care" becomes very gray and there is not much of a "black" or "white". My optometric frame of reference is very limited compared to yours KHE. Based on my own research I feel that optometric primary eye care should be the state of oklahoma's scope of practice for OD's. combined with Tennessee's prescribing scope (any drug deemed necessary for the treatment of ocular disease.)---to me that is the "ideal definition of optometric primary eye care". That still leaves all invasive ocular surgery beyond the PRK, trabs, iridotomies, SLT's, etc....that Oklahoma OD's do in the realm of ophthalmology. For god sakes, family practice doctors can do some invasive "in office" procedures but they are NOT surgeons. Oklahoma's scope of practice in my eyes is the model for the future.


Let the onslaught of---"you're just a lowly student, you should just go to medical school, why not just close down all the ophthalmology residencies, go refract and be happy, ophthalmologists have 24 years of training (k-12 + 4 yr BS + 1 yr + Ophtho residency), surgery by surgeons, your going to be very unhappy as an optometrist if you think that, you have an inferiority complex, -----------begin! :laugh:

You have FINALLY managed to make a coherent argument that can be respected but I think that the mistake that you're making is really two fold:

1) You keep comparing "can" with "should."

2) The primary care "model" that you propose tries to make optometry more and more "like them." In my opinion, that is a catastrophic mistake. We should try to be more "like them." If anything, we should try to be LESS "like them."

What you are proposing to do will NOT garner ODs any more respect or deference from other health care providers, and certainly not from ophthalmologists.

It will certainly not garner ODs any more respect or deference from patients.

It will not garner ODs any more compensation or deference from third party payors.

What you propose to do is to essentially blow optometries' entire policital and economic capital (because it will take all of it to accomplish what you want) on something that will not raise optometry's stature in the eyes of anyone and it will not garner us any higher reimbursement from anyone. That's where the difference between "can" and "should" comes in and sadly, I think that's the point you're missing. You are trying to make us more "like them" and to me, that's a recipe for disaster.
 
1) You keep comparing "can" with "should."

2) The primary care "model" that you propose tries to make optometry more and more "like them." In my opinion, that is a catastrophic mistake. We should try to be more "like them." If anything, we should try to be LESS "like them.".

I don't see oculomotor's points as a means to make us more like "them" at all. Ultimately it would allow us to be more complete clinicians--giving us the opportunity to treat the few patients we may lose every year to referrals.

What you are proposing to do will NOT garner ODs any more respect or deference from other health care providers, and certainly not from ophthalmologists.

Speculation. Not that it is really a concern of mine, if anything I think it could garner more respect for what we do, particularly from the non MD/DO providers--DPM, DMD/DDS, etc.

It will certainly not garner ODs any more respect or deference from patients.

Not necassarily, on a microcosmic level we could potentially be changing the public perception by one less referral at a time.


It will not garner ODs any more compensation or deference from third party payors.


Given a safe record of performing these procedures, wouldn't it potentially appeal to certain 3rd party payors and insurance companies--that whole idea of "cheaper labor"?
 
Last edited:
Speculation. Not that it is really a concern of mine, if anything I think it could garner more respect for what we do, particularly from the non MD/DO providers--DPM, DMD/DDS, etc.

First of all, I very much doubt this. But, even if we assume this is true - why the hell does it matter? How on Earth does more respect from a dentist change anything about being an optometrist?

Not necassarily, on a microcosmic level we could potentially be changing the public perception by one less referral at a time.

I doubt that. The public still respects FPs, assuming they're good at what they do and the patients like them. The same applies to y'all. I stick with ODs because the first one I ever went to see was great plus, unlike the MDs, most of y'all spend decent amounts of time with your patients. Keep that up and you'll be fine.

Given a safe record of performing these procedures, wouldn't it potentially appeal to certain 3rd party payors and insurance companies--that whole idea of "cheaper labor"?

That's exactly what vision plans have done - how's that working out for y'all?
 
KHE,

I talked to several OD's that practice in Oklahoma and they are very pleased with their scope and told me that it made them more able to serve the needs of their patients.
 
Getting back to the title of the post... Can someone tell me the origin of the term "Optometric Physicians?"

I will give you that most in this country do not know the difference between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist (many of my extended family members cannot get this right). (My guess is that this may help the profession of optometry - correct me if I am wrong).

However, I do think that most people in this country (or the world) would equate that term "physician" with either a DO or MD (someone that went to medical school). When did the definition of this word change? Should DOs and MDs come up with a new word to describe our profession?
 
So a group of lawmakers in FL came up with the term? Therefore optometry students started putting it on there lab coats? Therefore ODs started putting on their doors. Those darn lawmakers in FL....

Are you saying it is not the correct use of the word physician - you are just trying to comply with the language in FL law? I think I get it.
 
So a group of lawmakers in FL came up with the term? Therefore optometry students started putting it on there lab coats? Therefore ODs started putting on their doors. Those darn lawmakers in FL....

Are you saying it is not the correct use of the word physician - you are just trying to comply with the language in FL law? I think I get it.

I think the school is simply matching what the law says. I'm not really sure who came up with it but the rumor is that it would allow better access to medical insurance plans for optometrists. Although every practice I've seen in the area doesn't have any reference to that term on their doors or business cards. I think "doctor of optometry" works just fine.
 
Not necassarily, on a microcosmic level we could potentially be changing the public perception by one less referral at a time.

Uh, yeah. Meanwhile, thousands of patients flock to Walmart, Sears and Costco for eye exams. I don't care how many referrals you save, you aren't changing public perception one bit.

Given a safe record of performing these procedures, wouldn't it potentially appeal to certain 3rd party payors and insurance companies--that whole idea of "cheaper labor"?

Great, just what we want. Let's do all this useless work so a handful of ODs can be more "like them", only so we can do the procedures at cutthroat rates. Count me in:rolleyes::rolleyes: By the way, VSP is doing to their best to help us bill more and more medical, and guess what? They don't pay worth a damn. Just what we want.
 
eyestrain,

I have to agree with vsarge0708 in the fact that having a scope of practice like oklahoma's allows OD's to have a more complete clinical toolbox so to speak. I can't see the "sale" of contacts and glasses as a self-sustaining profit maker for OD's in the future when you have places like Sam's and Costco offering those products for cheaper and cheaper. More procedures = more profit period and I would rather bet on a future with more procedures like SLT, iridotomies, etc...than relying on selling glasses and contacts for 65% (according to AOA survey) of our profits.....
 
Getting back to the title of the post... Can someone tell me the origin of the term "Optometric Physicians?"

This issue has been discussed probably about 100 times on SDN. A quick search through the archives will give you the answer you are looking for, and I can assure you that it has nothing to do with lawmakers in Florida.
 
eyestrain,

I have to agree with vsarge0708 in the fact that having a scope of practice like oklahoma's allows OD's to have a more complete clinical toolbox so to speak. I can't see the "sale" of contacts and glasses as a self-sustaining profit maker for OD's in the future when you have places like Sam's and Costco offering those products for cheaper and cheaper. More procedures = more profit period and I would rather bet on a future with more procedures like SLT, iridotomies, etc...than relying on selling glasses and contacts for 65% (according to AOA survey) of our profits.....

See, this is where you start missing the point. You keep screaming "primary care" from the mountain tops but now you are talking about SLT and iridotomies which while they are technically easy to perform, are procedures that are generally used when the treatment for a progressive optic neuropathy (glaucoma) gets so out of control that traditional medical therapy fails. Is that your definition of primary care. Same thing with YAG. Yes, it's technically easy to perform but it's a procedure designed to alleviate a complication following cataract surgery. (a complication that is becoming more and more rare as surgical techniques advance) Is that what "primary care" is?

And to go back to my point about "can" vs "should", I will tell you that I have about as much of a "medically oriented" optometric practice as you can have and the number of patients I have seen in the past year who could benefit from these procedures I can count on one hand. So, you have to forgive me if I think it's unwise to blow our entire political and economical capital on pursuing rights and privildeges that will me to see 5 extra patients a year.
 
KHE,

I talked to several OD's that practice in Oklahoma and they are very pleased with their scope and told me that it made them more able to serve the needs of their patients.

....and also quite possibly better able to serve the needs of their savings account as well by creating more procedures they can bill for themselves without having to refer to an ophthalmologist.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top