The College of Optometrists

Does anyone use optomap in their practice? is it helpful or just 'very gimmicky' how much does it cost to lease and what do u charge patients for it?

thanks

I used optomap but it was very time consuming and you have to have a practise which can charge realistically.

we find it very helpful...but too expensive. We rarely cover costs BUT it has differentiated us greatly.

We looked at Optomap in the past when thinking about retinal imaging. We decided to purchase a (very good) fundus camera in preference.

Some of my reasoning

I wasn't convinced about the image quality of the disc and macular.

I didn't like the companies compulsory leasing arrangement.

I felt uncomfortable with our patient data (re data protection)going to an outside company.

I am very impressed with our fundus camera

That said more practices in our area seem to have opted for Optimap than camera. They say if you sell it to all patients then it pays for itself and is a usefull tool. Most find it hard to do that and comment that it is a practice builder.

As an aside I have not been able to bring myself to reccomend photos to all patients even though I see the benefit. However our camera looks as though it will pay for itelf in one year.

hope this is helpful

surely the big problem with dig photo is that non-mydriatic is a misleading term. yes on kids and young adults you can get a good image but for early cats and miotic pupils, image quality can quite poor. that is also ignoring the time it takes for the second eye/pupil to return to normal after taking the first image. Topcon say you should sell it to all your patients to differentiate but then you have the variable image quality problem, so who is charged and who is not? The charging issue could be removed if a near neighbour has one and doesn't charge. If you are on a diabetic scheme or can get on one, then this certainly helps to pay for it and eliminates the choice of optomap.

We've been using Optomap for years. The patients love it. The main benefit is viewing peripheral retina very easily. We have spotted several retinal tears that have been repaired at the local hospital. Repeat imaging shows the repair - gratitude from patients. The local GPs are impressed but crucially the local ophthalmologists are not and resist our requests to e-mail images to them (printed out images are poor).

And, yes I agree, it is expensive and we barely cover the cost.

Optomap is a good machine for

1.Routine diabetic px(esp px who’ve been coming to your practice AND having no retinopathy from prev records) who’re driving the same day-saves you calling them back for a dilation.

2.Your wonderful pxs with "flashing lights and floaters”, since the periperal view is quite good AND it covers your back.

However, since it takes a fair bit of memory on the pc, therefore you need to start saving files on cds, otherwise the computer slows down while taking images.

I had a px in the HES low vision clinic registered as blind. He was pouring his heart out that he had been for an eye test with deteriorating vision and was told he needed a change of specs. He was also offered an "Optomap Photo" which he thought would be good and so paid extra for. He was informed that all was normal. Two weeks later he turned up at eye casualty with wet ARMD! Was this an incompetent optometrist? Was it that the staff didnt know how to interprete optomap results? Was it that optomap didnt pick any signs up? Or was it just bad luck on the patients part?

They offered me a lease thing where I had to put 120 patients through a month at a tenner each in other words 1.2K per month. They said I could charge 15 and make a fiver per head - This was too unrealistic for where I practice so I turned it down.

All these comments reflect all the problems I had with the Optomap.

I gave mine up, the team at Optos were great but they coud not get their head around the fact that is just not cost effective, anybody used a gdx.

All these comments reflect all the problems I had with the Optomap.

I gave mine up, the team at Optos were great but they coud not get their head around the fact that is just not cost effective, anybody used a gdx.

Finkle, jonesal is the person to ask about the gdx, he's an imaging guy. I've always thought it looks very good but with all these super duper machines a lot comes down to their reference of normative data. I don't think the gdx makers have got enough. The HRT does but then you've gotta draw your ring in the right place which means someone knowing what they are doing which means you, which means time, which impinges on cost to the patient.

saw a nhs presentation on three year/500k comparison of GDX/HRT/fields. On diagnosed OH pxs with glauc in one eye and nil in other, fields still was first to pick up changes before other two. As Xavier says HRT and GDX still have a way to go for their normative databases and until then I'd be wary of forking out for these. Probably rather by an FDT to supplement my Humphries.

thanks for the replies guys. i'm just thinking of other instruments to have that will help give our practice 'something different'. we already have a fundus camera. not keen on the GDx/HRT just yet. Maybe a colorimeter?

Bazzer - do you have a pachymeter yet?

Bazzer, I've just had the Optomap system installed. I am very impressed so far but, being a sole practitioner, I have found it a worry about making it pay(and I'm an easy going guy, John Prine, anyone). I see @ 12 px a day & @ 6 or 7 opt for optomap

I've also had the GDx installed and whilst a different worry financially (one off capital purchase on lease purchase) the selling of the concept to px takes some doing.

Colloquolly in the practice we refer to a full eye exam, an Optomap and a GDx as "The Full Monty" (it takes ages!).

Be careful tot he contract you sign.

It may cost you £36000 per year to rent, this would pay for a gdx and a fundus camera!