July 01, 2003
3 min read
Save

Sponsor withdraws N.J. optometry laser bill

You've successfully added to your alerts. You will receive an email when new content is published.

Click Here to Manage Email Alerts

We were unable to process your request. Please try again later. If you continue to have this issue please contact customerservice@slackinc.com.

TRENTON, N.J. — A bill that would empower the New Jersey State Board of Optometry to develop specific educational standards for incorporating new technologies has been withdrawn by its sponsor, Assemblyman Jeff Van Drew (D-Cape May).

Opposition from ophthalmology was a significant factor in the withdrawal of A-3364, which had been approved 5-1 by the New Jersey Assembly Health Committee.

“Our objective was clear – the preservation of patient safety and quality care,” said Mike Brennan, MD, American Academy of Ophthalmology secretary for state affairs, in an AAO press release. “This message resonated strongly in the capital halls of Trenton and with the citizens of New Jersey.”

Specifics of the legislation

According to Christopher Quinn, OD, FAAO, immediate past president of the New Jersey Society of Optometric Physicians, the bill has been misconstrued.

“The bill was intended to empower the state board of optometry to develop specific educational criteria. If optometrists were to successfully complete those defined criteria, it would allow them to incorporate new technologies into their practices, including lasers,” Dr. Quinn told Primary Care Optometry News.

The bill would have allowed optometrists in New Jersey to provide “the delivery of care reasonable to the diagnosis and treatment of conditions or diseases of the eye and adnexae, including, but not limited to, diagnostic and therapeutic applications of ophthalmic ultrasound and laser technology, as determined by the board.”

The bill does, however, exclude certain surgical procedures. The legislation stated that “these applications shall not include invasive intraocular surgery and LASIK surgery, which, for the purposes of this subsection, means the use of a mechanical microkeratome and blade to create a corneal incision.”

“This specifically refers to LASIK as it is now, with the use of a microkeratome to cut the flap,” Dr. Quinn said. “But, in the future, if a technology is developed in which a flap does not need to be cut, optometrists would be able to receive accreditation for that if the board considered it appropriate.”

Opposition from ophthalmology

The AAO spoke out against the bill and credited its own efforts with causing the legislation to “fall like a rock from the legislative agenda.”

According to the AAO press release, “Under the provisions of the bill, optometrists could have performed a wide range of eye surgeries including refractive, retina, cataract, glaucoma and lid surgeries.”

Also in the press release, Donald Cinotti, MD, AAO regional state affairs secretariat member was quoted: “It is unbelievable that an OD board, which is comprised of non-medical providers, would have had the authority to virtually grant a plenary license to optometrists practicing in New Jersey.”

Dr. Quinn said this representation of the bill is “categorically incorrect.”

“It’s the same misrepresentation that occurred in the 1970s and 1980s, when we fought over both diagnostics and therapeutics,” he said. “I have quotes you could take verbatim from 1982, and they are making the same claims today.”

Dr. Quinn said opposing ophthalmologists tried to use “scare tactics” to portray the bill as being harmful and to imply that optometrists would abuse expanded privileges.

“It’s insulting – the implication is that if you’re an ophthalmologist, you can use your judgment to know when you’re beyond your bounds,” he said. “But if you’re an optometrist, you are just going to do whatever you want, willy-nilly.”

He added that the New Jersey Society of Optometric Physicians looks forward to conducting a meaningful dialogue on the specifics of the bill.

“The bottom line is that the optometric society remains committed to the concept, but we didn’t really have the opportunity to focus on what the bill actually intended to do,” Dr. Quinn said. “So now that it has been withdrawn, we hope to engage in a dialogue with the public about the merits of this bill.”

For Your Information:
  • Christopher Quinn, OD, FAAO, is immediate past president of the New Jersey Society of Optometric Physicians. He can be reached at 485 Route 1, Suite A, Iselin, NJ 08830-3009; (732) 750-0400; fax: (732) 750-1507.
  • The American Academy of Ophthalmology can be reached at Suite 700, 1101 Vermont Ave. NW, Washington, DC 20005-3570; (202) 737-6662; Web site: www.aao.org.