optoblog.com

optoblog comic #29 FTC Rx

Since October 16, 2020 I have had to take an extra step at the end of the exam to explain to patients they they need to sign a statement saying that they received a copy of their contacts lens Rx. Firstly, some people get a bit apprehensive when asked to sign any kind of legalese- as they should. Second, the question “why?” pops up when they’ve been wearing contacts for years and never had to do this rigmarole before.

So, obviously, the Contact Lens Rule was created to punish all optometrists for the sins of a few. No doubt that online retailers were behind this. You would think the proper way to handle a complaint that your optometrist didn’t give you a finalized prescription would be to tell your state optometry board and let them correct the issue as their rules dictate. But that wasn’t good enough for the Feds, so now we live in a county where the FTC has requirements for optometrists- although the punishment for not complying isn’t spelled out clearly.

So if we’re going to take away power from the states regarding their administration of licensed professions, then let’s just be consistent and have a national optometry license and tell the states that they can take their boards and throw them in the septic tank where they also think all the optometrists belong.

The 2020 triumphant return of the optoblog comic! Enjoy #28

optoblog comic #28 Contact Lens Instruction

optoblog comic #27 Stop Losing It!

If it’s the law that I have to give them the Rx, then can it be the law that they have to keep it? Or pay for another one? Or pay to have it faxed or verified by a third party?

I have seen contact lens Rx’s on the black top of the Walmart parking lot. Can’t people at least take it home before throwing it away?

I wouldn’t be so annoyed, but lately lots of people have been asking for copies of their Rx, and every time I feel like asking, “What happened to the one I already gave you?”

I don’t get paid to fill it out the second time, you know.

optoblog comic #26 Penta Bridge Style

Real men need sturdy eyewear, but double bridges are so passé…

See it and read it here.

By the way, I have to apologize. I haven’t been using the official optometry seafoam green color in my Optoblog comics.
It has been described at OptViSci. From what I gather, it can be somewhat of a range of color, but I would assume that at least one of the colors on the aaopt.com website are probably the true Optometry Seafoam.
The RGB value I have been using on my first 24 comics has been an easy to remember 150,200,150 (Hex# 96C896). I thought it looked good, but now I’ve found something better: 132,175,148 (Hex# 84AF94).
I think it looks more seafoamy, and now that I’ve written it down, I know where to look if I forget the numbers. Look for comic #25 and onward to have the corrected color.

Which do you think is more seafoam-y?

With a mousepad, cut, copy, and paste YOU can draw too!

It appears that another optometrist with an actual art degree has been making comics for years and now has a book out. Review of Optometry even did a profile on Dr. Scott Lee, O.D.

I’ll bet he even draws them on paper instead of using a mouse in Paint.net.

Well, I see I shall have to get my game on to compete. But there is one thing Dr. Lee doesn’t have: seafoam green backgrounds. Yup, that was my idea.

I also now have Optoblog poetry, so I’m really diversifying my portfolio which will pay big dividends when I cash in on my book deal.

Be sure to stay tuned to my Optoblog comics. They’re just for optometrists. Patients won’t get them, but you will. Feel free to use them in your C.E. presentations. Send me a cell phone photo when you do!

To LASIK or not to LASIK...

I did this one because someone searched for “LASIK comic,” and I’m sure they were sadly disappointment that I didn’t have one.

Now before you get all over me for not spreading sunshine and lollipops about refractive surgery, let me first clarify that the above comic is comical, I thought. If I was told that my chance of winning the lottery was 99%, then I’d probably play it. If I was told that if I played the lottery that I had a 1% chance of dying then I wouldn’t play it.

I feel bad that I have to explain the resurrection reference, but I must make sure that those of you who never went to Sunday school understand that in the resurrection, our spirit will be reunited with our bodies which will be in a perfect form (our bodies, not us), so any LASIK disaster that plagued our days in mortality won’t bother our resurrected body.

My actual opinion regarding LASIK is pretty main stream. If someone really, really wants it and they have the proper medical prerequisites like cornea thickness, refractive error, good eye health, etc. AND they have a really good understanding of the risks and expectations, then I will recommend them to a good surgeon. Perhaps the surgeon that would do my LASIK if I wanted it.

But I don’t want it. I don’t fit the psychological profile since I’m perfectly happy in Night and Day contacts. I’m also rather wary of my family history since I’ve had three close blood relatives get it and most were left still needing glasses or enhancements.

The not so simple question...

There is a not-so-simple question that pretty much every patient asks, “How much is your eye exam.”

While the medical model has varying levels of exam, like Level II-New vs. Level IV-Est, which depend upon the history, exam, and complexity of that particular case; however, there are some among our profession that make it an especially hard question to answer, and this issue raises concern over the ethics of a fairly popular fee structure.

For example: the price in front of the Big Box says “Eye exams starting at $45!”
But are they really? Sure, for a “routine eye exam” where nothing is wrong and you just want your glasses updated, then it’s the $45. But what if I have some allergy eyes, so the doctor gives me a prescription for Pataday as well as my glasses Rx? All the sudden the exam somehow costs $120!?!?

Huh, something funny going on around here. I think big box doctors are more likely to do this since their exam fees are so low, they make up for it by gouging in other fees. I have no problem with a doctor who says their S0620 is $100 and their 92004 is $120. However, I think there is something wrong if the S0620 is $45 and the 92004 is $140.

It’s like some among us in the optometric profession are playing the windshield chip repairman scheme.

But what really happens? Patients won’t typically notice this bait-and-switch. It’s really the insurance companies who get hammered. The patient pays their copay, and if the doctor can come up with any excuse to bill a medical code, they use their medical model fee structure to justify it.

Ethics applies when we realize that, for some reason, private pay patients are rarely charged the same high fees as the insurance companies. Huh. Oh well. It’s a victimless crime because those big, bad insurance companies won’t miss the extra cash. Until we realize that the more insurance companies pay out, the more the patient’s premiums will be raised next year. Whoops. Sorry, Mrs. Smith, that you can’t afford to keep your medical insurance in the future because I wanted to get paid double or triple my usual fee because you have insurance today.

By the way, it cost me about $2000 to bill insurance last year (PIM software license, E-filing charges, and postage/paper for mailing statements/refunds). Also add to that the cost of time spent filing claims and handling overpayment and underpayment. If I didn’t have to deal with insurance, I could drop my exam fee by at least $5 per person.

I have an idea: All patients should pay for office visits out of pocket. If they have insurance, get reimbursed later. The doctor won’t know about their insurance, so there won’t be a conflict of interest about what exam fee structure he’ll choose. The doctor can lower his fees since filing claims is expensive and time consuming. Everyone wins. Another idea, insurances should allow me to charge either them or the patient a $5 claim filing service fee.

Take home point: I don’t believe it is ethical to have one fee structure for insurance patients and another drastically different one for private pay. Yes, I’m all for charging more money if something is more work and more time. That’s why a contact lens evaluation is paid on top of the routine eye exam. That’s why there are different levels of 99*** office visits. But sneaking a huge fee onto an insurance claim just because there is some medical code excuse is something I don’t think our profession should feel comfortable with.

Clear vision isn't all it's cracked up to be.

It’s the return of the Optoblog comics! Comics are by far the most searched for items on my blog, so I’m just bowing to demand.