Vision Express eye photo: useful or a gimmick

Voyager2002

I just went for an eye check up at my local optician: Vision Express. I was offered an additional service: for an extra ten pounds they would take a digital photograph of the back of my eye, and look at it to see if it indicated any problems on the way. I asked for more information and was given something of a hard sell: apparently these photographs can reveal early signs that a person is developing diabetes, glaucoma or other undesirable conditions.

So: does anyone have any opinions as to whether this is a valuable additional service, or a gimmick to extract an additional tenner from the gullible? Presumably there are other ways of finding out if you are developing diabetes.

mkbean

according to my optometrist sister, nice to have but not necassary below age 40

tanith

Shouldn't any problems be spotted whilst the checkup was being done? So what would the camera spot that a good optician wouldn't?

Nile

Voyager2002 wrote: »

I just went for an eye check up at my local optician: Vision Express. I was offered an additional service: for an extra ten pounds they would take a digital photograph of the back of my eye, and look at it to see if it indicated any problems on the way. I asked for more information and was given something of a hard sell: apparently these photographs can reveal early signs that a person is developing diabetes, glaucoma or other undesirable conditions.

So: does anyone have any opinions as to whether this is a valuable additional service, or a gimmick to extract an additional tenner from the gullible? Presumably there are other ways of finding out if you are developing diabetes.

Hello Voyager2002

I have regular (every 2 years) eye examinations and in April my optician/optometrist took the digital photograph (and showed it to me) for no extra charge.:cool:

He told me that next time (if I wanted the digital photograph again) he would have to make an extra charge.................which is not so:cool: .

It was fascinating to see the picture though and to have him explain what problems he'd be looking for. I'll have to see whether I can afford the extra charge in 2 years time............unless I win the lotto I'll probably decline.:o

Regards

Nile

Mojisola

If you are diabetic this is something that gets done annually at the hospital. By taking the photo they can enlarge it and see things which don't show by just looking at the eye. It also gives the opportunity to compare the photos to see any changes over the last twelve months.

lolly5648

I think this is a reasonable cost if you are over 50 when lots of eye changes happen. I had to have this done a few years ago when there were hardly any of these machines around and had to pay a fortune in Harley Street. (I could have been referred to my local eye hospital but there was a 6 months wait).

It turned out that I had a slight macular pucker left over from a vitreous detachment.

Running_Horse

It is a complete and total rip off.

If it was found that an registered Opthalmic Optician did not detect a serious eye condition during an eye examination when they had the equipment to do so, but didn't because they wanted an extra £10, they could be struck off by the GOC.

Next time they do this, demand the service for free, especially if you think you may be in a high risk group.

beedeedee

For anyone to really, properly examine or take photo's of the back of your eye, they would need to put drops in to dilate the pupil. Are they offering this?

nedmundo

Running_Horse wrote: »

It is a complete and total rip off.

If it was found that an registered Opthalmic Optician did not detect a serious eye condition during an eye examination when they had the equipment to do so, but didn't because they wanted an extra £10, they could be struck off by the GOC.

Next time they do this, demand the service for free, especially if you think you may be in a high risk group.

Digital Retinal Photography is an expensive service to operate and cannot be funded by the already loss-making eye examination. If an Optician (or Optometrist) couldn't pick up a condition through traditional means and offered the extra service, it would be viewed as the patients fault for not accepting the advice - charge or no charge.

Patients have no automatic right to further services for free, high risk or not.

nedmundo

beedeedee wrote: »

For anyone to really, properly examine or take photo's of the back of your eye, they would need to put drops in to dilate the pupil. Are they offering this?

The latest generation of fundus cameras do not require dilation of pupils (although this can produce better results). Dilation causes blurring and light sensitivity for about 4 hours afterwards, which means you can't drive! Imagine the inconvenience that would cause (unless there is good reason tp of course!)

Running_Horse

nedmundo wrote: »

it would be viewed as the patients fault for not accepting the advice - charge or no charge.

Patients have no automatic right to further services for free, high risk or not.

How would you feel if a patient on a low income developed a serious condition you could have detected, but your eye exam was less thorough than it would have been for a wealthy patient? Is it the patients "fault" for being poor?

Not very ethical really, is it?

The eye examination is only loss making because opticians use it as a loss leader to sell expensive glasses; hence the success of the likes of James Murray Wells.