Some Clarity, Some Fog: AG Opines on Physician-Optometrist Relationship.

An opinion by the Texas attorney general will keep the Texas Optometry Board (TOB) from exerting influence over the practice of medicine - to a certain point.

Centro de optometría y centro de refracción: norma técnica No. 12-2020­DRACES / Optometry Center and Refraction Center: Technical Standard No. 12-2020 ­ DRACES

Un poco apagada la tinta del documento y dificulta un poco la lectura DRACES [Departamento de Regulación, Acreditación y Control de Establecimientos de Salud] Este documento tiene como objeto "la regulación, autorización y control de los centros de optometría y centro de refracción, en concordancia con el Reglamento para la Regulación, Autorización, Acreditación y Control de Establecimientos de Atención para la Salud, Acuerdo Gubernativo No. 376-2007." Es de carácter obligatorio. Contiene además, las definiciones de los conceptos relacionados al tema principal, además de la infraestructura que deberá tener cada centro, incluidos el equipo y recurso humano y técnico.

Passive Verification: A Flawed System Putting Patients' Sight at Risk.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the rate of erroneous or expired (invalid) contact lens prescriptions submitted for passive verification at two practice sites in Cleveland, OH. METHODS: Passive verification facsimile (FAX) requests were collected from office staff at a county hospital (MetroHealth [MH]), and at a private ophthalmology group office (University Ophthalmology Associates [UOA]) in Cleveland, Ohio, from January 2013 to January 2018. RESULTS: A total of 415 verification requests were evaluated (339 MH, 75 UOA), 28.2% (104 MH, 13 UOA) were expired, 11.8% (48 MH, one UOA) were not under the care of the doctor to whom the request was directed, 8.9% (32 MH, 5 UOA) were incorrect, and 3.9% (16 MH, 0 UOA) did not complete fitting. The total rate of invalid prescriptions was 52.8% (200 MH, 19 UOA). CONCLUSIONS: There is a high rate of invalid prescriptions presented for passive verification. Although the majority of prescriptions are simply expired, there is a fraction of prescriptions that contain incorrect specification of lens parameters or no record of prescription by that doctor. The current mechanism of passive verification, with the burden on the provider for denial within a short time window, makes it likely that such prescriptions would be filled, potentially putting patient comfort and safety at risk.

A Systematic Evaluation of State Laws Governing Optometric Glaucoma Management in the United States Upto 2015.

PURPOSE: To describe state laws that govern the optometric practice of glaucoma management in the United States and to correlate those laws with state demographics upto 2015. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We performed a cross-sectional ecological study of the 50 United States and the District of Columbia. Regulations governing optometric scope of practice as written by each state Board of Optometry were reviewed. Specific optometric privileges assessed included: ability to manage glaucoma independently, use of diagnostic pharmaceutical agents, use of therapeutic pharmaceutical agents (including topical and oral steroids and other oral pharmaceutical agents), IV injections, intraocular injections, therapeutic lasers, presence of defined referral, and comanagement guidelines, and hours of yearly continuing education needed for glaucoma management. Optometric privilege was compared with demographic and employment information for each state. RESULTS: Optometrists in all states, except for Massachusetts, and the District of Columbia are allowed to manage glaucoma; 16 states have defined comanagement guidelines. Therapeutic lasers are allowed in 3 states: Kentucky, Louisiana, and Oklahoma. States with defined comanagement guidelines had a mean of 6.9±1.9 ophthalmologists per 100,000 people, significantly more than the 5.3±1.1 in states without defined comanagement of glaucoma (P<0.01). Binary logistic regression showed that, accounting for population and area, the higher the number of optometrists in a state, the less likely there is to be defined comanagement [ß (SE)=-0.008 (0.003), P=0.02] and the greater the number of ophthalmologists in a given state, the more likely a state has defined comanagement [ß (SE)=-0.13 (0.006)]. CONCLUSIONS: There is a diversity of regulations that govern optometric management of glaucoma in each of the 50 states and the District of Columbia. The number of optometrists and ophthalmologists in a state may influence state regulations governing optometric practice and referral guidelines.

The status of low vision rehabilitation and certification in the state of Michigan.

BACKGROUND: With the estimated increase in the number of Americans with vision-related disabilities on the horizon, the need for optometrists with expertise in low vision rehabilitation services will increase. State optometric certification in low vision rehabilitation is currently only available in 3 states through affiliations between the state optometric associations and other organizations or government entities. METHODS: A mail survey was conducted among Michigan Optometric Association member optometrists designed to address the current percentage of optometrists who practice low vision rehabilitation as well as the percentage who are low vision certified through the Michigan Optometric Association and to establish future need for additional low vision rehabilitation providers in the state. RESULTS: Of the 188 participants, only 26.0% stated that they provide low vision rehabilitation services, the majority of whom provide only primary care low vision rehabilitation. Only 6.4% of respondents are certified low vision rehabilitation specialists through the Michigan Optometric Association. CONCLUSION: The low percentage of optometrists in the state of Michigan who practice low vision rehabilitation may lead to a shortage of providers for the aging and visually impaired Michigan population seeking low vision rehabilitation services. Even fewer are certified low vision providers through the voluntary Michigan Optometric Association certification process.