LENZ REleases Positive Phase 3 Presbyopia Data

Seeing the risks of letting optometrists do eyelid surgery - American Medical Association

Always interesting—and informative—to see it from the other side.
 
What are these one hundred and twenty eyelid surgeries?

Chalazion removal right upper lid?
Chalazion removal right lower lid?
Chalazion removal right eye unspecified?

Chalazion removal left upper lid?
Chalazion removal left lower lid?
Chalazion removal left eye unspecified?

Does that count as six surgeries?
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Jeffrey Kiener
Yeah, there's just no freaking way.

I guess you can pull up the 6000 CPT codes and anything that resembles lid or lacrimal you can post.

What a bunch of scaremonger losers. Probably have their techs doing some of it. Probably have their ODs doing some of it.

If that's the best they've got, I feel sorry for their argument.
 
One of our speakers on CEwire who's an OMD and a friend told me. "You want to excise a Chalazion? Be my guest. It's disgusting, The patient is not happy during the procedure. It takes time and doesn't pay all that well. Be my guest"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Randall Bernstein, Tim WELTON and Jenifer Ambler
I've had one done, myself.

In an operatory.

Betadine.
Eyelid injection of anaethetic (ouch)
Evert lid and use that iron maiden thingy.
Slice over bump.

BUT THEN...cut and dig and snip and dig to excise the capsule. That was more than I expected.

I don't want to do chalazion removal.
 
  • Like
Reactions: David Gregory Luce
The oculoplastic teacher/surgeon mentions how it is not on our radar to notice cancerous eye growth. She had two cases in her interview. She cherry picked. But she is mostly afraid that her job will go away if ODs start doing more grunt lid work.

I, for one, am not expanding my scope into surgery. Dissecting old cystic capsules sounds no fun for anyone Jeff.

I have referred exactly no one for chalazia excision in over 30 years. Maybe she should not let them become such nasty bumps.

How did yours get to that stage anyway, just curious to learn what is possible?
 
Jeffrey Kiener said:
I've had one done, myself.

In an operatory.

Betadine.
Eyelid injection of anaethetic (ouch)
Evert lid and use that iron maiden thingy.
Slice over bump.

BUT THEN...cut and dig and snip and dig to excise the capsule. That was more than I expected.

I don't want to do chalazion removal.
Click to expand...
I have done them when I taught in the OMD program.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffrey Kiener
This OMD is at UIowa, and academics live in their own bubble and have no clue what is actually happening in the real world.

We had injections passed without much of a fight, and we haven't heard a peep from the private practice OMDs around here. Honestly not many ODs are really taking advantage of this scope, like most we are a conservative bunch. The whole bringing up examples of a missed diagnosis etc is a low blow, do they really want to start bringing up cases of that vs a surgeon botching a case?

Bringing this up years later after the the bill was passed just seems petty and makes me not want to refer there.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffrey Kiener
Derrick Randall said:
This OMD is at UIowa, and academics live in their own bubble and have no clue what is actually happening the real world. We had injections past without much fights, and we haven't heard a peep from the private practice OMDs around here. Honestly not many ODs are really taking advantage of this scope, like most we are a conservative bunch. The whole bringing up examples of a missed diagnosis etc is a low blow, do they really want to start bringing up cases of that vs a surgeon botching a case? Bringing this up years later after the the bill was passed just seems petty and makes me not want to refer there.
Click to expand...
Well, for me, the issue is about MDs slandering us and our education trying to set our scope of practice based on not wanting to lose reimbursements. I don’t WANT to do chaplain excisions. I’ve done them and as mentioned above, they’re freaking gross and don’t pay very well. I’d like to be able to do one if NEEDED, but I’m not running around chasing chelations to cut out.

I’m just sick of these assholes and the neverending smear campaign telling the public we’re going to murder them without dime store fake doctor degree. They did it with dilating drops, topical antibiotics, glaucoma meds, oral meds, “surgical procedures” like punctal plugs and now it’s injectables and lumps/bumps.
 
Steven E. Nelson said:
Well, for me, the issue is about MDs slandering us and our education trying to set our scope of practice based on not wanting to lose reimbursements. I don’t WANT to do chaplain excisions. I’ve done them and as mentioned above, they’re freaking gross and don’t pay very well. I’d like to be able to do one if NEEDED, but I’m not running around chasing chelations to cut out.

I’m just sick of these assholes and the neverending smear campaign telling the public we’re going to murder them without dime store fake doctor degree. They did it with dilating drops, topical antibiotics, glaucoma meds, oral meds, “surgical procedures” like punctal plugs and now it’s injectables and lumps/bumps.
Click to expand...
The funny thing is we are running out of OMDs who want to do it around here. Most just want the cataracts and premium IOLs. Not many will even do a chalazion removal anymore, not worth their time.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dallas Fitzgerald
Derrick Randall said:
The funny thing is we are running out of OMDs who want to do it around here. Most just want the cataracts and premium IOLs. Not many will even do a chalazion removal anymore, not worth their time.
Click to expand...
That’s really the funniest part of all. A lot of them absolutely don’t want to do it, they just don’t want US to be able to do it.

It’s like grating glaucoma. They don’t want to sit around doing IOP checks, they just don’t want us to be able to do it WITHOUT them. They’d much rather us only being able to do it in their offices under their “direction” as their employees.

As always, it’s just about money.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffrey Kiener
Steven E. Nelson said:
That’s really the funniest part of all. A lot of them absolutely don’t want to do it, they just don’t want US to be able to do it.

It’s like grating glaucoma. They don’t want to sit around doing IOP checks, they just don’t want us to be able to do it WITHOUT them. They’d much rather us only being able to do it in their offices under their “direction” as their employees.

As always, it’s just about money.
Click to expand...
Some are starting to hire PAs. Nothing against PAs, my wife is one, but they get 0 education on eye things in school.

One of the big Ophthalmology groups recently hired a PA that works under a cornea specialist. It is funny they will easily hand off procedures to PAs, but will fight to the death over ODs doing anything.

You'd think it'd be easer to hire an OD than PA to deal with eye issues.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Derrick Randall said:
Some are starting to hire PAs. Nothing against PAs, my wife is one, but they get 0 education on eye things in school. One of the big Ophthalmology groups recently hired a PA that works under a cornea specialist. It is funny they will easily hand off procedures to PAs, but will fight to the death over ODs doing anything. You'd think it'd be easer to hire an OD than PA to deal with eye issues.
Click to expand...
As this website isn't even remotely secure and our words have been used against us and even put in congressional record, allow me to reword this in a more complete way for public consumption:

PAs aren’t an economic threat as they're not an independent licensed doctoral level diagnostic/therapeutic profession. ODs establishing a precedent and history of successfully doing these procedures at the highest level of skill (as we ALWAYS do in these situations and have for 30 years as we're historically licensed decades behind our education and training) is a very direct threat to the long-standing unfair and criminal monopolization of medical eye care by ophthalmology.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Jeffrey Kiener
What's interesting to me is NEVER hearing them talk about ARNPs and PAs doing procedures. Those 2 professions can do whatever they want surgically, even though most don't do eyelid surgery. Hell, primary care is more dangerous than we will ever be.
 
Jim Schroder said:
What's interesting to me is NEVER hearing them talk about ARNPs and PAs doing procedures. Those 2 professions can do whatever they want surgically, even though most don't do eyelid surgery. Hell, primary care is more dangerous than we will ever be.
Click to expand...
They can't do it INDEPENDENTLY and that's the entire difference.
 
Steven E. Nelson said:
As this website isn't even remotely secure and our words have been used against us and even put in congressional record, allow me to reword this in a more complete way for public consumption:

PAs aren’t an economic threat as they're not an independent licensed doctoral level diagnostic/therapeutic profession. ODs establishing a precedent and history of successfully doing these procedures at the highest level of skill (as we ALWAYS do in these situations and have for 30 years as we're historically licensed decades behind our education and training) is a very direct threat to the long-standing unfair and criminal monopolization of medical eye care by ophthalmology.
Click to expand...
One of my VA sites had a PA they were training to do eye stuff in the hospital ER (I guess because none of the OMD’s or ODs wanted to go down there). It was a freakin’ joke…
 
  • Angry
Reactions: Steven E. Nelson
You must log in or register to reply here.
Visionix
Top Bottom
Back
Home
Forums
Webinars
Menu