There is a distinct Ground Rush effect building over the Review of General Ophthalmic Services. If the government takes on board just a fraction of the ideas suggested in the Response from the optical bodies, life in optical practices will be very different.
The Response (see News) covers pretty much every argument made for greater optometric involvement in primary care over the years. It spells out in clear, if somewhat lengthy terms, how optometry has the skills to act as the primary healthcare gatekeeper for the wellbeing of the nation's eyes.
There is an almost theatrical feel to the Response, hardly surprising given that it is the culmination of 10 years' work by at least one of the protagonists. Like the 'big speech' in the final scene of a 1950s Hollywood spectacular the Response promotes the powers of the profession and leaves the reader wondering why optometry doesn't already have the role so clearly laid out for it. All that is left is for the government to see the light, legislate and fund.
The question that Optician feels isn't being discussed in the profession is whether the average practitioner understands or wants the quantum shift advocated. One section of the Response eloquently argues why an 'eye examination' should be funded to the tune of £66.60.
On the basis that a £37 eye exam figure has been mooted, based on a 25-minute consultation, the Response argues that practices, such as those shortlisted in the Optician Awards, spend on average 45 minutes with their patients.
The primary healthcare utopia sketched out makes perfect sense to the more clinically inclined. But in reality not every PCT will want to direct their funding towards such schemes, not every practice will want to take part in shared care and not every optometrist will have the skills or the inclination to practise in the necessary fashion. In short some practices like selling frames and lenses.
There is a primary healthcare role to be performed, but by what proportion of the profession?