The College of Optometrists

I think retinal photography is fantastic, but as more and more practices go digital I am amazed by the numerous claims which can be cited. Can for the first time ARMD, Glaucoma and peripheral retinal lesions can be assessed by optometrists?

Indirect (and even direct!) techniques have always been available for such tentative diagnosis, and to my knowledge indirect ophthalmoscopy is still the gold standard mehtod of viewing retinal pathology by ophthalmologists and optometrists.

Do you think such claims create public confusion? Or even perhaps imply variation in clinical superiority, is this legal, decent, honest and truthful when advertising?

Of course retinal photography is unsurpassable with regards recording and monitoring abnormality and as such a valuable clinical tool. But when it comes to viewing the fundus I will not be giving up Slit lamp BIO or Head set BIO.

I think the Optomap is FANTASTIC.........it has its limitations but once you've used it a few times you realise how good it is.