Impartial Advice on Laser Eye Surgery

[13m]

RobM77 said:

13m said:

RobM77 said:

The surgeon's secretary in my case had worked closely with the surgeon for years and it was her you spoke to, so the triage in that respect was much better than it would be in a commercial operation. I can't see how it could be better?

Was your surgeon's secretary medically trained then? I very much doubt it, beyond at best being trained as a medical secretary.

RobM77 said:

Secondly, if you needed to see the surgeon, the response time for an appointment would be just as good if not better than you describe above.

What less than an hour? I doubt that.

RobM77 said:

Thirdly, with regard to your last paragraph, obviously there are good and bad consultants - follow ups for me were all booked in on day one and came at no extra charge.

Well the last two experiences I had were with two of the leading consultants in their fields in this area. One of them is one of the leading consultants in the UK in his field. So arguably, in that sense at least, they are "good consultants".

The person answering the phone in a commercial operation won't be medically trained either.

No, but he or she put me in front of someone who was medically trained as swiftly as I could get to the practice. You, however, were dealing with a secretary.

RobM77 said:

impressed with the service I received.

Glad you had a good result.

[968]

13m said:

No, but he or she put me in front of someone who was medically trained as swiftly as I could get to the practice. You, however, were dealing with a secretary.

You were not put in front of a medically trained person. You were seen by an optometrist. Rob may have spoken with the secretary but she would have liased with the surgeon who did the surgery. In your case you may well have ended being seen by a different surgeon or one with no experience in the management of complex corneal issues as they have never trained to do so.

[dave_s13]

I think we should pack it in with the bickering really. Where else can you get sound advice from an obviously well experienced and qualified medic, for free and in a timely manner. Tit for tat bickering will just kill the thread and disadvantage the many.

My wife still hasn't had her initial assessment and I really want to get 968s opinion on what they're offering first. Don't piss him off too much eh?

[968]

dave_s13 said:

I think we should pack it in with the bickering really. Where else can you get sound advice from an obviously well experienced and qualified medic, for free and in a timely manner. Tit for tat bickering will just kill the thread and disadvantage the many.

My wife still hasn't had her initial assessment and I really want to get 968s opinion on what they're offering first. Don't piss him off too much eh?

No worries. Takes more than anecdote to piss me off! Let me know what happens with your wife's assessment.

[13m]

968 said:

13m said:

No, but he or she put me in front of someone who was medically trained as swiftly as I could get to the practice. You, however, were dealing with a secretary.

You were not put in front of a medically trained person. You were seen by an optometrist. Rob may have spoken with the secretary but she would have liased with the surgeon who did the surgery. In your case you may well have ended being seen by a different surgeon or one with no experience in the management of complex corneal issues as they have never trained to do so.

An optom has, I think, five years of training. I'd rather have someone of that calibre see me, very swiftly, and refer me to the surgeon (who would almost certainly have been the same one that did the op) than have a game of Chinese whispers via a secretary.

Dave, I am not trying to piss anyone off. But I think the notion that the consultant route is in every regard superior to a commercial operator needs to be dispelled. Having had experience of both I know that not to be the case.

[968]

13m said:

An optom has, I think, five years of training. I'd rather have someone of that calibre see me, very swiftly, and refer me to the surgeon (who would almost certainly have been the same one that did the op) than have a game of Chinese whispers via a secretary.

No they don't have 5 years training and are not MEDICALLY trained. Yhey would also have no idea about how to manage a surgical complication. You would in fact have a high chance the surgeon you'd see would not be the same one as these companies often use itinerant surgeons some of whom are not resident in the uk. They fly in, operate and leave. This is precisely why the GMC are changing regulations.

[whoami]

968 - O/T but would appreciate your input.

Can glaucoma "suddenly" occur without any real symptoms?

[968]

whoami said:

968 - O/T but would appreciate your input.

Can glaucoma "suddenly" occur without any real symptoms?

Depends on the type. Primary open angle does not suddenly occur. It develops over many years. By the time symptoms appear, it's late in the course of the disease. Primary angle closure or acute angle closure can but is much rarer.

Why do you ask?

[whoami]

968 said:

whoami said:

968 - O/T but would appreciate your input.

Can glaucoma "suddenly" occur without any real symptoms?

Depends on the type. Primary open angle does not suddenly occur. It develops over many years. Primary angle closure or acute angle closure can but is much rarer.

Thanks.

Background is my father suddenly started experiencing sight problems.

Went to optician (who had performed routine eye test in March) who referred to hospital.

Hospital diagnose glaucoma which has caused irreversible damage.

I thought it sounded unlikely that there were no traces of this at all when his eyes were tested in March.

At follow up today with consultant, he was "vague" regarding whether the optician should have noticed something amiss in March.

[968]

whoami said:

Thanks.

Background is my father suddenly started experiencing sight problems.

Went to optician (who had performed routine eye test in March) who referred to hospital.

Hospital diagnose glaucoma which has caused irreversible damage.

I thought it sounded unlikely that there were no traces of this at all when his eyes were tested in March.

At follow up today with consultant, he was "vague" regarding whether the optician should have noticed something amiss in March.

It almost certainly would have been evident for some years but without careful assessment, it is often missed. Regrettably I see this precise scenario frequently. Usually it's due to the relative inexperience of the assessor and often due to patients not being examined fully with a dilated pupil examination of the optic nerve head.

[13m]

968 said:

13m said:

An optom has, I think, five years of training. I'd rather have someone of that calibre see me, very swiftly, and refer me to the surgeon (who would almost certainly have been the same one that did the op) than have a game of Chinese whispers via a secretary.

No they don't have 5 years training and are not MEDICALLY trained. Yhey would also have no idea about how to manage a surgical complication. You would in fact have a high chance the surgeon you'd see would not be the same one as these companies often use itinerant surgeons some of whom are not resident in the uk. They fly in, operate and leave. This is precisely why the GMC are changing regulations.

They do 4 years degree in optometry and one year training in-post don't they?

I cannot speak for all operators, but I know in the case of OE it would have been the same UK-based surgeon. Which firm do you believe uses overseas surgeons who fly in to operate and fly out again?

[968]

13m said:

They do 4 years degree in optometry and one year training in-post don't they?

I cannot speak for all operators, but I know in the case of OE it would have been the same UK-based surgeon. Which firm do you believe uses overseas surgeons who fly in to operate and fly out again?

I repeat, they are not medically trained.

A variety of companies use itinerant surgeons. I'm not going to name and shame as this is a public forum.

[whoami]

968 said:

whoami said:

Thanks.

Background is my father suddenly started experiencing sight problems.

Went to optician (who had performed routine eye test in March) who referred to hospital.

Hospital diagnose glaucoma which has caused irreversible damage.

I thought it sounded unlikely that there were no traces of this at all when his eyes were tested in March.

At follow up today with consultant, he was "vague" regarding whether the optician should have noticed something amiss in March.

It almost certainly would have been evident for some years but without careful assessment, it is often missed. Regrettably I see this precise scenario frequently. Usually it's due to the relative inexperience of the assessor and often due to patients not being examined fully with a dilated pupil examination of the optic nerve head.

Unfortunately, that's confirmed my suspicion.

I've requested a copy of their examination notes from March and will take it from there.

Thanks again.

[968]

whoami said:

Unfortunately, that's confirmed my suspicion.

I've requested a copy of their examination notes from March and will take it from there.

Thanks again.

Am sorry to hear it. The main thing is for the ophthalmologist to ensure no further vision loss from glaucoma and to assess the extent of optic nerve damaged sustained.

[13m]

968 said:

13m said:

They do 4 years degree in optometry and one year training in-post don't they?

I cannot speak for all operators, but I know in the case of OE it would have been the same UK-based surgeon. Which firm do you believe uses overseas surgeons who fly in to operate and fly out again?

I repeat, they are not medically trained.

A variety of companies use itinerant surgeons. I'm not going to name and shame as this is a public forum.

I stand corrected, 5 years training in Scotland and a minimum of 4 down here. Either way, more training than a consultant's secretary.

You may be right, some firms may use itinerant surgeons. However, I'd expect most people to at least check who their surgeon was going to be. I know for a fact that the chap who did my RLE was UK-based and I was told who he was in advance so I could vet him.

[968]

13m said:

I stand corrected, 5 years training in Scotland and a minimum of 4 down here. Either way, more training than a consultant's secretary.

You may be right, some firms may use itinerant surgeons. However, I'd expect most people to at least check who their surgeon was going to be. I know for a fact that the chap who did my RLE was UK-based and I was told who he was in advance so I could vet him.

I know you're very keen to try and make a point and think you're correct and I'm glad you had a great result. However, there have been numerous patients I have seen who have not. Indeed so many complaints that regulations are been introduced to improve the conduct of the multinationals.

The optom who saw you would have not the first idea how to manage a surgical complication. They are not medically trained. They essentially triage queries and do a limited assessment. Sadly, in many cases, the surgeons themselves cannot manage their own complications. This is where the problems arise and why many choose to see named refractive surgeons to do their procedure and ensure their aftercare.

Your anecdotes are just that. They do not represent the majority of consultants.

[13m]

968 said:

13m said:

I stand corrected, 5 years training in Scotland and a minimum of 4 down here. Either way, more training than a consultant's secretary.

You may be right, some firms may use itinerant surgeons. However, I'd expect most people to at least check who their surgeon was going to be. I know for a fact that the chap who did my RLE was UK-based and I was told who he was in advance so I could vet him.

I know you're very keen to try and make a point and think you're correct and I'm glad you had a great result. However, there have been numerous patients I have seen who have not. Indeed so many complaints that regulations are been introduced to improve the conduct of the multinationals.

The optom who saw you would have not the first idea how to manage a surgical complication. They are not medically trained. They essentially triage queries and do a limited assessment. Sadly, in many cases, the surgeons themselves cannot manage their own complications. This is where the problems arise and why many choose to see named refractive surgeons to do their procedure and ensure their aftercare.

Your anecdotes are just that. They do not represent the majority of consultants.

I think we need to agree to differ, don't we.

[Pistonheader101]

Grandad7184 said:

if you can afford I would highly recommend moorfields Eye hospital and Prof David Gartry

http://www.davidgartry.co.uk/about-us/what-our-pat...

my OH had it done by him and so did most of her family cost about 4.5K but your getting the very best

How’s his sight 4 years on?