LADEMINUS:

Again u fall foul of common knowledge here, ophthalmology has no relationship with epidemiology, neither does optometry, however anyone with the facts at his disposal can make a sane claim (even you) and pls, even a nurse can diagnose glaucoma... What u r saying that an optometrist cannot diagnose glaucome is just like claiming that a doctor cannot diagnose cancer... In both cases of the clinician has the knowledge and instrumentation then he can make d diagnosis. In fact even a year 3 med student can confidently infer a serious cancer correctly!!

aijaydiva:
my dear! I'm not here to argue but to help create awareness. One thing abt glaucoma is that it has the chronic (primary open angle glaucoma) and the acute one(closed angle glaucoma) which is usually an emergency case. The former is d most common one and is usually the most hammered one because of its lack of symptoms. In dis case vision gradually reduces without the patient even noticing this reduction in vision until one day he notices that his extent of vision has drastically reduced. Most times its detected by the clinician in d course of examination of other eye problems or routine eye check up.
Regular check up is always the answer for early detection and management.

ACM10:

You are yet to answer my question. Gradual loss of vision is one of the symptoms of glaucoma. There are many others. Keep gradual visual loss by the side, how can someone make a diagnosis of glaucoma from the other signs and symptoms? Since you are not an optometrist, I wouldn't want to push you further. I would have loved to have this debate with an optometrist. But I will put a stop to it here.
The optometrist who referred you to an ophthalmologist is worthy of emulation. I salute his professionalism. How I wish other optometrist could copy him. Most will toy with the patient until the very end before referring to an ophthalmologist. Please follow the instructions of an ophthalmologist strictly. Be compliant with your check-up visits. All the best.

Cogent:

LMAO.
Something tells me you are an ophthalmologist

Abeg abeg abeg, ACM10, you can be a good ophthalmologist without trying to drag Optometrists' name through the mud kwanu? Medical practitioners need to stick together and work hand in hand in order to further the standard of healthcare in the country. No need for the unnecessary snubbing.

Your earlier statement that Optometrists cannot diagnose glaucoma was very wrong and instead of admitting it you tried to change the subject to a debate about glaucoma.

I just hope you are not feeding people wrong information like this in real life.

ACM10:

No sir/madam! I am not an ophthalmologist and can never be one. I did not feed anyone wrong information.

ACM10: Mind you that it is wrong for an optometrist to play doctor.

Cogent:

So what exactly are you and what makes you think you can authoritatively declare that Optometrists cannot diagnose Glaucoma?

AN OPTOMETRIST IS A DOCTOR !
Are you deliberately trying to cause misunderstanding or are you truly this ignorant? I would advice you to google 'Optometrist' if you don't know what the profession is about.

An Optometrist is different from an Optician.
Maybe you are confusing one profession for the other. Google whatever you are not clear about. Stop spreading misinformation.

Answer:
To answer this question, it is important to distinguish between an optometrist and an ophthalmologist as people often confuse the two. An ophthalmologist is a fully qualified medical doctor who focuses on the eye. An optometrist is not a medical doctor, but does receive several years of specialized training on the eye, prescribing prescription eyeglasses/contacts and diagnosing eye disorders.

Legally, an ophthalmologist can do everything an optometrist can do although in practice day-to-day eye care is typically left to optometrists while ophthalmologists focus more on surgery, prescribing medication and treating more complex eye conditions. Both are an important part of the US healthcare system.

As for whether an optometrist is "called doctor," it depends on the country. In most countries an optometrist is not addressed as "doctor," this title being reserved primarily for medical doctors and those with PhDs. Within the US, the profession has made a particular point about wanting to be addressed as "doctor" and it has become broadly accepted convention to refer to optometrists as such.
http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Are_optometrists_called_doctor

Cogent: In short let me place the information here because you might still come to this thread and insist that you are not spreading misinformation and that Optometrists are not Doctors.

From Wikipedia;
Optometry or Doctors of Optometry is a health care profession concerned with the health of the eyes and related structures, as well as vision, visual systems, and vision information processing in humans. Optometrists (also known as ophthalmic opticians outside the United States and Canada are trained to prescribe and fit lenses to improve vision, and to diagnose and treat various eye diseases. In the United States and Canada optometrists are Doctors of Optometry and are held to the same legal standards as any physician

Read more here ---> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Optometry

aijaydiva: @ACM10 what qualifies one as a doctor is not the course u studied but the number of years spent in d course of study. Those countries dat that dont license their optometrists as doctors do not spend d same no.of yrs as d doctors of optometry. Nobody here ever said optometrist are medical doctors. They cant be when dey didnt study medicine. They are doctors of optometry. Hence the O.D just like M.D for d medical graduates. Even a pharmacist cld be a doctor of pharmacy without Ph.d just by studying 4 6yrs instead of 5. So Monsieur, i guess u have to have respect for other professions. If everybody in Nigeria is like u, the interprofessional relationship in d health sector wld lead our country to nowhere. BTW optometry is my thing.

ACM10:

I agree with you. They can be professors of optometry. But that does not give them the license to toy with people's eye or to exceed the area of competence.

@first bolded. . .

@second bolded. . .now I know where you are coming from. But why did u shy away when I wanted to take you on glaucoma.

ACM10:
If you an an optometrist, permit me to debate you on how one can truly make a diagnosis of glaucoma.

Sir you are misinforming the general public with the bolded and I will not allow you to get away with it. An optometrist is not a medical doctor! If you did not bag an MBBS, then you are not a medical doctor. However an optometrist can attach Dr to his name after he has acquired a doctorate(Ph.D) degree in optometry. I decided to post an internet resource that could be of help to you in resolving your area of conflict.

ACM10:
I agree with you.They can be professors of optometry. But that does not give them the license to toy with people's eye or to exceed the area of competence.

Cogent:
I am not interested in your debate. You can shove it.



ARE YOU BLIND? ? ?

WHERE DID I SAY THAT AN OPTOMETRIST IS A MEDICAL DOCTOR?

I NEVER SAID AN OPTOMETRIST IS A MEDICAL DOCTOR, STOP PUTTING WORDS IN MY MOUTH!!!

I NEVER SAID MEDICAL DOCTOR, GO AND REREAD WHAT I WROTE AND STOP PRETENDING YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT I WROTE BECAUSE YOU DON'T WANT TO ADMIT YOU ARE WRONG.

I am a Dumbass.

ACM10:

Fixed!

I ignore this fo.ol and move on

Otses: This is one scary disease. When I was misdiagnosed of it, I almost went crazy. As God would have it, I was certified okay after I went for the test. I stopped complaining of wearing glasses when the thought of blindness hit me. Indeed, you never know what you have until you lose it.

aijaydiva:
there are three things that confirm the diagnosis of glaucoma, viz, the intraocular pressure (IOP), the individual's visual field and the appearance of the optic nerve head (optic disc). Someone having just high IOP doesnt indicate glaucoma but that patient could be a glaucoma suspect.

StateOfMind:

Thanks for this piece of information. Now I know why the doctor said I'm a glaucoma suspect. I have high intraocular pressure, but he said my visual field is okay. Dunno about the optic nerve disc one sha.

The eye clinic that misdiagnosed me initially just concluded I had glaucoma cos I had high IOP without considering the two other things you mentioned above.

ACM10:
If you an an optometrist, permit me to debate you on how one can truly make a diagnosis of glaucoma.




Sir you are misinforming the general public with the bolded and I will not allow you to get away with it. An optometrist is not a medical doctor! If you did not bag an MBBS, then you are not a medical doctor. However an optometrist can attach Dr to his name after he has acquired a doctorate(Ph.D) degree in optometry. I decided to post an internet resource that could be of help to you in resolving your area of conflict.

ACM10:

Are you serious with the comment that a 3rd year medical student can confidently infer a serious cancer correctly? You must be having a laugh. I guess you are not in tune with the medical school curriculum. In case you don't know, epidemiology is a subsection of every medical field that can make diagnosis of infectious and non-infectious disease. I'm not here to denigrate the optometry profession. They are noble people. But I hate it when people exceeds their limit of competence. For instance, a woman died in our hospital 3 days ago from the complications of labour. She had a previous history of caesarean section during her 2nd delivery, but delivered vaginally in his 3rd pregnancy. Presented at the hospital for her 4th delivery. Unfortunately, the doctor was not around, so the labour was managed by a nurse. She went ahead to augment labour with oxytocin in a woman with signs of obstructed labour and with a previous history of caesarean section. Hmmm. . .ofcourse she had an uterine rupture and was rushed to our hospital. This is a case of a nurse playing doctor. Those little extra knowledge doctors have is what differentiates them from other health workers.

Rewind back to glaucoma. Tell me the criteria for making the diagnosis of glaucoma and how can you differentiate it from intraocular hypertension? I'm waiting. . .

ACM10:


You were doing well until the bolded. I guess you did not read my comment well. Maybe you should put on your prescription lens, or better still, replace it with a high power lens. We are basically saying the same thing. There is no denying the fact that an optometrist operates at a primary eye care level, while an ophthalmologist operates at a tertiary eye care level. What I frowns at is a situation where an optometrist will make a bold claim that bothers on epidemiology. That area is an exclusive reserve of ophthalmologists. An optometrist cannot even make a diagnosis of glaucoma. So how can he jump to epidemiology when he cannot make the diagnosis of the disease in question? We should learn to separate the job of different cadres of health workers. No need to introduce this unnecessary confusion.

ACM10:


You are yet to answer my question. Gradual loss of vision is one of the symptoms of glaucoma. There are many others. Keep gradual visual loss by the side, how can someone make a diagnosis of glaucoma from the other signs and symptoms? Since you are not an optometrist, I wouldn't want to push you further. I would have loved to have this debate with an optometrist. But I will put a stop to it here.
The optometrist who referred you to an ophthalmologist is worthy of emulation. I salute his professionalism. How I wish other optometrist could copy him. Most will toy with the patient until the very end before referring to an ophthalmologist. Please follow the instructions of an ophthalmologist strictly. Be compliant with your check-up visits. All the best.

Cogent:


LMAO.
Something tells me you are an ophthalmologist

Abeg abeg abeg, ACM10, you can be a good ophthalmologist without trying to drag Optometrists' name through the mud kwanu? Medical practitioners need to stick together and work hand in hand in order to further the standard of healthcare in the country. No need for the unnecessary snubbing.

Your earlier statement that Optometrists cannot diagnose glaucoma was very wrong and instead of admitting it you tried to change the subject to a debate about glaucoma.

I just hope you are not feeding people wrong information like this in real life.

ACM10:


You are ignorant! Optometrist is equivalent to a radiographer, while an ophthalmologist is equivalent to a radiologist. Though an optometrist is trained in eye care, but his skills are limited. You wouldn't want an optometrist to toy with your eyes on the operating table.

originbm:


A moronic input again...
An optometrist can
1.Independently diagnose
2.indpendently prescribe drugs
3.Independently treat with other modalities
4.Independently prescribe non pharmacological agents
5.Operate a full clinic.

Finishes a 6yr course of 275+ credit loads with a minimum of credit pass for all course,inclufing pathology.pharmacology, epidemiology, neuropathology, ocular pathology, public health, paediatric optometry etc. Fail ONE clinical course and repeat a yr.
If he is not qualified to be called a doctor who is? The average bsc holder accumulates an average of 160 credits....


Go and do your homework . Then come and talk again..

ACM10:


You were doing well until the bolded. I guess you did not read my comment well. Maybe you should put on your prescription lens, or better still, replace it with a high power lens. We are basically saying the same thing. There is no denying the fact that an optometrist operates at a primary eye care level, while an ophthalmologist operates at a tertiary eye care level. What I frowns at is a situation where an optometrist will make a bold claim that bothers on epidemiology. That area is an exclusive reserve of ophthalmologists. An optometrist cannot even make a diagnosis of glaucoma. So how can he jump to epidemiology when he cannot make the diagnosis of the disease in question? We should learn to separate the job of different cadres of health workers. No need to introduce this unnecessary confusion.

Slankey:
Dr Echendu Damian, an Optometrist, says more than 11.2 million people will lose their ability to see properly by 2020 due to the effect of glaucoma worldwide.

Damian, who is the Chairman of the Nigerian Optometric Association, FCT Chapter, said this in Abuja on Monday on the sidelines of a walk organised by the Ophthalmological Society of Nigeria, as part of activities to mark the World Glaucoma Week.

According to him, already glaucoma had rendered 4.5 million blind gblobally.

He said that the walk was organised to create awareness on the menace of glaucoma and advised the public to ensure that it examined its eyes at least once a year.

“Glaucoma is the silent thief of sight. It’s a group of diseases that lead to damage to the optic nerve, the nerve that sends information to the brain, for one to see.

This latest research can cure your Glaucoma and reduce your eye pressure in just two days check here for free assessment and free PDF file in understanding the root cause of Glaucoma
https:///2G6rstbit.ly/2G6rst

“And it is estimated that globally, about 4.5 million people have been blind due to glaucoma; and it is also projected that by the year 2020 about 11. 2 million will lose their sight due to glaucoma.

“So, what we are doing today is to enlighten the public on this scourge and to let them know that it’s very important for them to go to an eye clinic and have their eyes examined at least once every year.

“Why we are saying this is because glaucoma is a condition that does not come with any sign or symptom.

“One can wake up one day and find out that he or she is not seeing. And by the time he or she gets to the hospital you find out that its glaucoma that has caused it.’’

The chairman said though glaucoma could not be treated, its progression could be slowed down to prevent blindness if diagnosed early.

“We are having free screening in all clinics and all the general hospitals in the FCT for glaucoma.

“So, from today (Monday) till Friday, members of the public have been invited to avail themselves of the opportunity to go to the eye clinics in town, go to the general hospitals in Kubwa, in Asokoro, in Wuse, in Maitama, in the State House Medical Centre, in Gwagwalada Specialist Hospital, in other private eye clinics in town and have their eyes screened for glaucoma for free.”

Damian, who said that there was no known cause of glaucoma, explained that some of the conditions that could encourage its emergence were increase in eye pressure, short sightedness and family history.

He said that glaucoma was more common in black people and people above the age of 40 years were also at risk.

“If you are above 40 years of age, it’s also expedient that you will have your eyes checked because it’s also common with advancing age.’’

NAN reports that members of the all the ophthalmological societies in the FCT participated in the walk.

The walk commenced from Berger through Wuse market carrying placards and distributing flyers, after which a health talk on glaucoma was given.

Some of the placards read: “190,000 Nigerians are diagnosed with glaucoma yearly’’; “Half the people with glaucoma do not know they have it’’; and “If you change your glasses frequently, get screened for glaucoma’’.