Optician inspecting own jobs ethical?

[Caddy]

Another thread on ethics made me wonder if it would be ethical for an optician who does his own edging to inspect and pass his own work.

Would knowing that he could save more money passing substandard lenses cause a conflict of interest? I'm thinking no, but I just want to get your opinions.

[CME4SPECS]

I inspect them to be sure they are worthy of putting my name on them!!

[Chris Ryser]

...............wonder if it would be ethical for an optician who does his own edging to inspect and pass his own work.

Would knowing that he could save more money passing substandard lenses cause a conflict of interest?

1) Most young opticians who start out are alone in a shop and they have to check their own jobs. It is all about how he looks at his profession. Doctors usually tell patients to come back to verify the Rx and any non properly done job would get discovered.

2) In these times of plastic stock lenses which are all made in molds I dont think you will find any real substandard lenses anymore. You might want to buy less expensive non brand lenses which might be as good as the brand names.
If the lab sends you a surfaced lens that is off power you will send it back and tell them to redo.

[cocoisland58]

In small offices you have to check your own work. If something is questionable you might have someone look at it. I have never thought of checking my own jobs as being unethical. My reputation and the reputation of everyone in this office depends on quality workmanship.

[OptiJim]

Does anyone check your dentists work before you leave the office?

[HarryChiling]

The scenario you are getting at is called an unethical optician.

[For-Life]

Of course it is ethical.

Allowing a job that goes through wrong is not.

[EyeFitWell]

Not to mention the fact that it is illegal to dispense incorrect glasses...

[For-Life]

Not to mention the fact that it is illegal to dispense incorrect glasses...

Doesn't seem to stop some people

[EyeFitWell]

True, but it should.:(

[Barry Santini]

Not to mention the fact that it is illegal to dispense incorrect glasses...

Whoa!! "incorrect glasses"? Just what is meant by that?

Incorrect against an Rx that my not be optimal?

Incorrect in that they have had a POW compensation made to them, even if they are just standard corrected curve single vision?

Incorrect in that the Rx they're base upon was determined during an exam where, unbeknownst to all, they examinee has become diabetic, and their sugar is up, and the Rx really turns out to be temporary?

In my view, glasses are almost never incorrect or correct, they're just either optimal/non optimal, satisfactory or unsatisfactory... and to what degree?*

or possibly stupendous!

or maybe "the absolute pits!"

(* this is the focus of my ABOM paper)

In my state (NY) if it really was "illegal" to dispense *incorrect* glasses...well...then I would have locked up a long time ago!

My 2 cents

Barry

[Caddy]

I guess I'm just trying to figure out why it's different than an OD dispensing glasses as being unethical.

[For-Life]

I guess I'm just trying to figure out why it's different than an OD dispensing glasses as being unethical.

Because the OD is prescibing the prescription and the glasses. Therefore, the OD *could* change the RX to gain more profit from the RX or prescribe products to seek more profit.

With checking lenses, someone is checking the work to verify it is correct. The only other way it can be done is if the lenses are sent out to an external verifer (out of office).

[HarryChiling]

I have heard of OD's that give even emmetrope a slight Rx so they could bill medicare.

I have also heard of opticians that pull the next closest Rx just so they won't lose the sale.

In both cases it would be unethical even if "you are not causing any harm"

[fjpod]

Because the OD is prescibing the prescription and the glasses. Therefore, the OD *could* change the RX to gain more profit from the RX or prescribe products to seek more profit.

With checking lenses, someone is checking the work to verify it is correct. The only other way it can be done is if the lenses are sent out to an external verifer (out of office).

Both of the cases you cited are really the same. The dr or optician is faced with a decision that can have a positive or negative financial impact on themselves. It may save/make money in the short term when you do the wrong thing. If you do the wrong thing too many times, you get a reputation and eventually lose money. Same with the OMD and cataract surgery.

[RGC_man]

Spent most of my career working for a company where a qualified dispenser was supposed to double-check your work. Nearly always they stopped after a while because I never knowingly sent out something incorrect. But I always preferred the double-check for my own peace of mind.

[Framebender]

to final our own work. That's the difference. Saying, I fabricated these. These Opticians are always going to survive, and the good ones are going to thrive.

That being said, now when I run jobs someone else finals and I'm OK with that!

[mlm]

I've never thought of it in terms of "ethical" or "unethical". All the clinics I've worked in had someone else in the office do the final verification and quality control check. Not because we don't trust the optician, but because fresh eyes may catch something the optician didn't. Just like I'd have someone else edit my essay before handing it in to the prof back in school.

[orangezero]

I have heard of OD's that give even emmetrope a slight Rx so they could bill medicare.

I have also heard of opticians that pull the next closest Rx just so they won't lose the sale.

In both cases it would be unethical even if "you are not causing any harm"

I have to chime in here. Medicare could give too cruds about whether someone is emmetropic, myopic, etc. Medicare uses their definition of "medical" and refractive error is not included, unless its very specific circumstances. probably just mispoke, but i have to give you a hard time since we agreed on too much yesterday.

That being said, I think it brings up a good point. This whole, "be honest" philosophy that we are supposed to adhere to could be why we as a society don't let bank robbers and car theives refract, or prescribe medication, or work on our fillings, or take away their license when they do (extremely rarely, I hope). Its also why there is such a disgusting attitude on this board (as there should be) when someone does something dishonest in our industry and is put on TV or in the newspaper. There is something to be said for public shame I suppose.

I do see the benefit in a multiperson organization to have more than one person check an Rx before it leaves the lab, just to hopefully reduce the occasional mistake. I don't believe there would be a proper/cost effective way to watch over all the opticians even if it was something that a small minority of people thought would be important enough to deal with. If we can trust optometrists, we can surely trust opticians... :)

[HarryChiling]

i have to give you a hard time since we agreed on too much yesterday.

Everynow and then; when the moon, sun and planets align it has been known to happen. :D

[Rheaopt]

If you checked the job originally and it was ok then and it was actually a little off it would still be off when you check it later. I don't think it's wrong to check your own work, but I think if it was a little off the first time it, it will be a little off the second time. That is why we use two people to do inspection.

[The Mighty Mutt]

I would double check my own work a lot more often if I could. I take a lot of pride in the quality of optics I send out of the lab. Unfortunately, the lab is too understaffed to check every job before it goes out. I live in a part of Arizona that has a high population of Navajos, who often have high astigmatisms. So the biggest problem we have is making sure that the axis is within the tollerance of the cylinder power. Not so easy to do when your company is too cheap to get decent equipment, and ..........

sorry, not very happy with "the company" these last few weeks

~The MightyMutt

[Scott R]

Pharmisists are responsible to verify that they are dispensing the right medication. Give someone with a heart condition viagra and you will be on the news coast to coast. I have learned to double check any medication I pick up at a chain pharmacy. My wife and grandmother have the same first and last name. A pharmacy tec. ( cheap labor ) gave my wife the wrong RX. He could have caused her a sizure or heart attack. :angry: He was lucky his supervisor and I know eachother for years.

Check and dispence work as if you were makeing specs for your family.

Every satisfied patient might tell someone where he got his specs. An unhappy customer especally if the Dr. told them the specs are wrong will tell everyone.

My reputation is on every pair of specs walking out the door.

[Barry Santini]

and saw a friend of mine working at the Optical counter. I asked him "Don't you feel bad having to work today?". He said he didn't mind. I saw that he had a HUGE box of finished eyewear in front of him.

I asked him if he had to check (verify) these glasses (in). He said "yes"..but I don't feel like it today.

The following exchange occurred:

Barry: How many times have you found the Costco lab to make a mistake in the workorder?
Optician: Very, Very rare
Barry: How many times have you found that the client was unhappy/unsatisfied with the eyeglasses
Optician: Somewhat frequently
Barry: How many times is this *dissatisfaction* related to either the Prescribed Rx, or the client not being either with-it during the choice process, or just capriciously changing their mind afterward?
Optician: Very frequently
Barry: So what's the point of verifying all the eyewear from the lab if most of your problems/redos occur *after* verification?
Optician: I see your point...

And he then took the box of unverified eyewear and put it aside.

Sometimes, I think our accuracy/checking efforts are well-beyond what is needed...given the rest of the current/surrounding dispensing paradigm.

What are your thoughts?

Barry Santini, ABOM

[a1vo]

At all Costco optical I used to work, even the manager did not care about verifying the jobs came back from lab. Frequently there are 50+ some time 100+ jobs a day back from lab and there is no way there are enough employee to handle the work load. Lab perform their own QA (we see attached printout from lensometer). Only after pt complaint, then glasses got re-checked at the store level.