Ohio Alert: Proposed Legislation Affects Licensed Opticians

**John Bruening** · 10-20-2013, 12:40 PM

Although not a frequent poster here, I do try to stay active in my profession by following what is going on at the statehouse, as well as staying active in th e state society. Here is an article from Mark Glasper, AOA Executive Director:

http://www.oao.org/news/137801/Propo...-Opticians.htm

I was able to attend an Interested Parties meeting at the statehouse on October 16th, hosted by State Representative Anne Gonzales, and the tone of it was anything but friendly towards opticianry. I did not represent any state organization at the meeting, but rather attended as an independent optician, to possibly have a say in health and safety of consumers, and also to have a voice in the future of our profession.

Opponent testimony will be heard this week. Please contact Mark Glasper (his contact info is in the link) if you would like to have some input into this issue. Letters are needed, as well as personal testimony on how this will affect the safety of consumers in Ohio.

If you do not fit or dispense contact lenses, write a letter anyway. Do not think that this is a pure contact lens issue. It is my opinion that this is the first of many assaults on our license. We have a license now. Let's fight to keep it.

**Optician1960** · 10-20-2013, 05:13 PM

With all due respect, the legislation is offering a very reasonable rule change that does not put the general public at risk. Here it is:Sec. 4725.411. A licensed spectacle dispensing optician may dispense contact lenses if the only action necessary is to match the description of the contact lenses that is on the packaging to a written prescription.
The contact lens companies have spent millions of dollars on their packaging to assure that it is simple to understand and choose the correct lens to match the Rx. This to assure that the general pubic is not put at risk. We can only imagine the lawsuits that would occur if the packaging was confusing. The licensed spectacle dispenser in Ohio "should" be prepared enough to understand the written Rx, and the rest is only matching it to what is written on the box. If the licensed spectacle dispenser is not capable of doing this correctly, then there are bigger problems in Ohio, one could suspect.

If this is OK'd, then maybe the Ohio Opticians Board should consider having the spectacle dispenser take a CE on reading contact lens scripts and matching them to the CL boxes every other year.

From a political standpoint, we ask our legislators to come up with reasonable legislation that makes life better for the people, to call out Rep Gonzales on this reasonable change is sending the wrong type of message...

**drk** · 10-20-2013, 05:45 PM

Let's not be naiive. Why is this bill coming up? Who is behind it? Commercial opticals that can't find enough CL-licensed opticians, or who do not wish to pay a premium wage?

Or is it Ohio-based internet CL companies, who are finding it bothersome to keep a token license on staff?

Any bill that cuts the testicles off CL licensure is bad, folks. If this is supported, what's the point in having the CL license? To fit scleral contacts? I think not.

This is an incremental step towards deregulation.

**drk** · 10-20-2013, 05:51 PM

Originally Posted by Optician1960

With all due respect, the legislation is offering a very reasonable rule change that does not put the general public at risk. Here it is:Sec. 4725.411. A licensed spectacle dispensing optician may dispense contact lenses if the only action necessary is to match the description of the contact lenses that is on the packaging to a written prescription.

With all due respect, a trained seal could do that. A trained seal could also match a pharmaceutical Rx to 30 tablets of oxycontin, as well.

The contact lens companies have spent millions of dollars on their packaging to assure that it is simple to understand and choose the correct lens to match the Rx.

An Rx is a doctor's order, not a set of parameters. There is more to filling a prescription than "A" matches "B".

This to assure that the general pubic is not put at risk. We can only imagine the lawsuits that would occur if the packaging was confusing. The licensed spectacle dispenser in Ohio "should" be prepared enough to understand the written Rx, and the rest is only matching it to what is written on the box. If the licensed spectacle dispenser is not capable of doing this correctly, then there are bigger problems in Ohio, one could suspect.

Again, the idea of CL licensing is a broad base of knowledge and responsibility to participate in CL care. That's why you get the license. Not to handle a box or match numbers.

If this is OK'd, then maybe the Ohio Opticians Board should consider having the spectacle dispenser take a CE on reading contact lens scripts and matching them to the CL boxes every other year.

From a political standpoint, we ask our legislators to come up with reasonable legislation that makes life better for the people, to call out Rep Gonzales on this reasonable change is sending the wrong type of message...

I don't think you understand what the correct message is.

The correct message is that we have less CL dispensing regulation than ever, due to the internet. We must hold the line against further erosion of protection of the public by at least having the state boards regulate the flesh-and-blood opticians, who are willing and able to safely serve the public.

It's NOT ABOUT CONVENIENCE.

**drk** · 10-20-2013, 05:52 PM

Mr. Bruening, what can I do to help, other than what you requested? I will bring this up to the Ohio Optometric Association.

Full disclosure, as I think all should that are on this thread: I am a private practice OD in Ohio. If you wish to contact me, personally and non-anonymously, PM me.

Optician1960, please disclose your affiliation.

**Optician1960** · 10-20-2013, 06:36 PM

drk, the Board is there to "protect the public" from harm, not protect the jobs of the people who perform them. Like it or not, that is what government is for. I think we would agree that we do not want Boards to act as quasi unions. There are parts of dispensing we should argue they be done by licensed people and some things that can be handled by others, especially those licensed in a field with similar attributes.

As for the pharmaceuticals analogy, I'll let someone else have fun with that low hanging fruit...

Reality is, the OD's in Ohio have been a challenge for the "licensed" opticians in Ohio, and probably more so than this little change that is being asked for. Many OD and MD offices do not employ licensed opticians to measure, final inspect, dispense, train apprentices on spectacles. With so many of them dispensing eye wear now, this has changed the landscape for opticians. Rightfully, the Docs spend most of their time in the lane with patients and their rules allow them to manage their businesses significantly different than the licensed optician must... Would you propose that the OD rules of the future (or past) be brought to the opticians board for an OK so they can rue on how this might effect their licensed opticians before they are enacted?

**Optician1960** · 10-20-2013, 07:28 PM

drk, I am a licensed spectacle dispenser in Ohio. I have never, and believe I will never in the future have responsibilities for picking CL's or handing them over to patients. I can guarantee you would not want me teaching insertion, removal or much about CL's. Picking a box off the shell with the Drs Rx, now that I could do... So no conflict from a personal financial or political gain here.

I simply was on Optiboard, saw the comments, and offered an opinion on what I believe the rules of government/boards are and are not. Agree or disagree, no hidden agenda here.

Peace...

**NavyChief** · 10-20-2013, 08:27 PM

I get more ticked being a dual licensed optician. I took the time & cost to get licensed. If you work for a retail business of any sort (even if you have a OD practicing out of your office) you HAVE to be licensed to act/perform as a CL optician. But in Doctors offices, their staff don't need to be licensed to dispense contact lenses as long as they are paid by the Optometrist/Ophthalmologist. Tell me Ohio isn't a messed up state. Rules don't effect those working under a Doctor, since they are performing under their license, and they don't have to be an apprentice or ever get licensed. Crazy

**drk** · 10-20-2013, 08:29 PM

drk, the Board is there to "protect the public" from harm, not protect the jobs of the people who perform them. Like it or not, that is what government is for. I think we would agree that we do not want Boards to act as quasi unions.

Good point.

OD's in Ohio have been a challenge for the "licensed" opticians in Ohio...Many OD and MD offices do not employ licensed opticians to measure, final inspect, dispense, train apprentices on spectacles.

Undoubtedly. Times can change? We have common concerns.

Would you propose that the OD rules of the future (or past) be brought to the opticians board for an OK so they can rue on how this might effect their licensed opticians before they are enacted?

I'm not clear on the question.

**drk** · 10-20-2013, 08:30 PM

Delete

**Optician1960** · 10-20-2013, 09:03 PM

drk: I will withdraw my OD Board question... Not as relevant as I had first thought, and that was during the football game that had 50% of my brain at that time... LOL...

Thanks for the rational conversation...

**Johns** · 10-20-2013, 09:29 PM

I agree with DRK that this may be the beginning of deregulation.

**Johns** · 10-20-2013, 09:41 PM

If they are just pulling contacts off of shelves, then why go through all this bother? Why not just put them in vending machines and call it a day?

**John Bruening** · 10-20-2013, 10:33 PM

Originally Posted by drk

Mr. Bruening, what can I do to help, other than what you requested? I will bring this up to the Ohio Optometric Association.

Full disclosure, as I think all should that are on this thread: I am a private practice OD in Ohio. If you wish to contact me, personally and non-anonymously, PM me.

Optician1960, please disclose your affiliation.

Thank you DRK, and thank you Optician 1960 for participating in the discussion. Since I posted this thread, I've had more private message from people outside the state, than from those in Ohio.

the Board is there to "protect the public" from harm, not protect the jobs of the people who perform them. Like it or not, that is what government is for. I think we would agree that we do not want Boards to act as quasi unions. There are parts of dispensing we should argue they be done by licensed people and some things that can be handled by others, especially those licensed in a field with similar attributes.

I couldn't agree with you more! The board is not there to protect jobs, and that is the furthest thing from my mind. I own my own business and will have a job regardless of what happens. As I mentioned in a private message to Optician 1960, if this bill passes, I will actually save money on my payroll. I sincerely believe, based on what I've seen at some of the offices I've visited, as well as my own, that all contact lens dispensing should be left to licensed contact lens opticians. This is not to preserve optician jobs, but rather to protect the public from harm. Many will say that you are just pulling boxes off a shelf, and yes, a monkey trained or otherwise could do that. Currently though, contact lenses are classified as medical devices, and should be treated as such. I'll also leave the low hanging fruit for others, but the pharmacist analogy was the exact one I used at the meeting at the statehouse. I think it fits.

Disclosure: I am an independent, dual licensed in the state of Ohio.

**Optician1960** · 10-20-2013, 10:43 PM

Johns: Just to be sure, the new issue is to have licensed spectacle opticians pull the box of contact lenses and then give to the patient, not have the patient pull the box...

I have no clue as to if this is a bigger conspiracy than CL lenses being pulled by Spectacles licensees or not... Ohio has pretty reasonable license rules and would probably not be the place to pick that fight. But then again, nobody called me to ask about this rule, so what do I know...

**idispense** · 10-21-2013, 04:51 AM

Do Ohio licensed eyeglass opticians vs Ohio licensed contact lens opticians , know the difference between a contact lens written Rx vs an Rx written for eyeglasses ? If this law passes then can you be sure all written rxes will be plainly marked

"contact lens Rx"
or
"eyeglass rx only"

**idispense** · 10-21-2013, 04:59 AM

Will the licensed Ohio eyeglass only dispenser, actually see the original Dr's Rx or will the patient provide it by the patient typing it into a computer ?

Why did the politician bring this motion forward ? Who promoted the politician into action and was there a coresponding political donation ?

Does the politician know the difference between a Contact Lens Rx vs a Eyeglass Rx.?

**wmcdonald** · 10-21-2013, 06:50 AM

Originally Posted by Optician1960

drk, I am a licensed spectacle dispenser in Ohio. I have never, and believe I will never in the future have responsibilities for picking CL's or handing them over to patients. I can guarantee you would not want me teaching insertion, removal or much about CL's. Picking a box off the shell with the Drs Rx, now that I could do... So no conflict from a personal financial or political gain here.

I simply was on Optiboard, saw the comments, and offered an opinion on what I believe the rules of government/boards are and are not. Agree or disagree, no hidden agenda here.

Peace...

I note that you list yourself here as a retailer. I am not from Ohio, but could you, per chance, be the relative of an OD? Some of these folks took the time to study and be certified in CLs, and you should support that. Now, I for one, hate these silly split licenses. Every Optician should be required to study all facets of this field prior to earning the professional title.

**rdcoach5** · 10-21-2013, 07:43 AM

Originally Posted by Optician1960

drk, I am a licensed spectacle dispenser in Ohio. I have never, and believe I will never in the future have responsibilities for picking CL's or handing them over to patients. I can guarantee you would not want me teaching insertion, removal or much about CL's. Picking a box off the shell with the Drs Rx, now that I could do... So no conflict from a personal financial or political gain here.

I simply was on Optiboard, saw the comments, and offered an opinion on what I believe the rules of government/boards are and are not. Agree or disagree, no hidden agenda here.

Peace...

OK, here's just one example. You or your referring Dr has ordered Biofinity trials for your pt. There is nothing on the blister pack that tells you it is a Biofinity. I'm not making this up. That is how the trials were sent, at least originally. Here's a better example. Your pt. comes in to pick up his/her GP lenses and the lab neglected to put any peripheral curves on it. I have seen this also. Needless to say, I added the necessary int and peripheral curves before dispensing. Now, if you know nothing about contact lenses, who suffers from that and who is liable for the inevitable abrasion? Third example, your trial soft contact lens is contaminated with a fungus but you don't know to even look at it to check. These are medical devices and should be so treated.

**wmcdonald** · 10-21-2013, 07:52 AM

Originally Posted by drk

Mr. Bruening, what can I do to help, other than what you requested? I will bring this up to the Ohio Optometric Association.

Full disclosure, as I think all should that are on this thread: I am a private practice OD in Ohio. If you wish to contact me, personally and non-anonymously, PM me.

Optician1960, please disclose your affiliation.

Thank you for your objectivity, Dr. K. You d'man!

**MakeOptics** · 10-21-2013, 01:24 PM

I think optician1960 has offered the best comments thus far in this thread, as a professional in the field without the CL side of things in his repertoire even he admittedly does not understand the risks. I am guessing that if he does not understand the risks then legislators don't understand the risk and the public doesn't understand the risk, how to communicate this risk to the general public?

Is it worth communicating?

Did anyone see this deregulation coming?

What now?

I think this thread is very interesting and would love to see others opinions.

**John Bruening** · 10-21-2013, 02:20 PM

What concerned me most about the meeting is that they referred to "boxes" and "pulling off the shelf", often, but contact lenses were mentioned only once or twice.

The meeting opened with the representative introducing herself, and then explaining that as a contact lens wearer, she was inconvenienced when she went to pick up her 6 month supply. This is not a dig at her, and I am certainly not calling her out on this, this is just how it was presented. Safety was not mentioned until the opticians brought it up, and it was quickly rebuffed. Someone from retail side (I believe it was an OD) even said something to the effect of:"Who are you guys trying to fool, there are only two diameters anyway..."

**MakeOptics** · 10-21-2013, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by John Bruening

What concerned me most about the meeting is that they referred to "boxes" and "pulling off the shelf", often, but contact lenses were mentioned only once or twice.

The meeting opened with the representative introducing herself, and then explaining that as a contact lens wearer, she was inconvenienced when she went to pick up her 6 month supply. This is not a dig at her, and I am certainly not calling her out on this, this is just how it was presented. Safety was not mentioned until the opticians brought it up, and it was quickly rebuffed. Someone from retail side (I believe it was an OD) even said something to the effect of:"Who are you guys trying to fool, there are only two diameters anyway..."

Wow, and OD was leading the charge on that one, that's hard to believe. Yeah they are pretty simple, but then you get into the 8.4 is outta power so the 8.8 will do (advice from the friend/grocery store manager/cashier/tire guy).

It's funny where I live they are too complicated to be fit by an optician, but just a 100 miles west where you live they are simple enough to be OTC. Sheesh, didn't we invent this thing, how come we have zero say in how they are used or fit but here the general public gets to voice an opinion?

**Uncle Fester** · 10-21-2013, 03:40 PM

An MD where my wife works is fighting to save the sight of a young man who ignored instructions by over wearing the lenses, never removing them, and when his vision deteriorated thought it would be ok to put another new lens on top of the old one. When that got stuck he did it again!

Corneal transplant is being rejected.

**NavyChief** · 10-21-2013, 03:53 PM

I'm not upset with the Optometrists or their board. I am with the Opticians board. They allow individuals pay and working for Doctors to NOT have to even apprentice as the least.