Rule-making notices
Notice of Hearing
Optometry Examining Board
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that pursuant to authority vested in the Optometry Examining Board in ss.
15.08 (5) (b),
227.11 (2) and
449.18 (7), Stats., and interpreting ss.
449.01 (1),
449.08 and
449.18 (7), Stats., the Optometry Examining Board will hold a public hearing at the time and place indicated below to consider an order to repeal the Note following s.
Opt 6.03 (2), the Note following ss.
Opt 6.04 (1), and
Opt 6.05 (4); to renumber s.
Opt 6.04 (2); to renumber and amend s.
Opt 6.05 (6); to amend the Note following ss.
Opt 5.10 (3),
Opt 5.16,
6.04 (1),
6.05 (2) (a) and
(b) and the Note following s.
Opt 6.05 (6); and to create ss.
Opt 5.02 (5),
5.08 (2) (d),
6.02 (3),
6.04 (2),
(6) and
(7) and
6.05 (6) (a) to
(o), relating to conduct, examinations, continuing education, and affecting small business.
Hearing Date, Time and Location
Date: June 2, 2005
Time: 9:30 A.M.
Location: 1400 East Washington Avenue
Room 180
Madison, Wisconsin
Appearances at the Hearing
Interested persons are invited to present information at the hearing. Persons appearing may make an oral presentation but are urged to submit facts, opinions and argument in writing as well. Facts, opinions and argument may also be submitted in writing without a personal appearance by mail addressed to the Department of Regulation and Licensing, Office of Administrative Rules, P.O. Box 8935, Madison, Wisconsin 53708. Written comments must be received by June 12, 2005 to be included in the record of rule-making proceedings.
Analysis prepared by the Department of Regulation and Licensing.
Explanation of agency authority: The Optometry Examining Board is authorized under ss.
449.07 and
449.08, Stats., to discipline optometrists for unprofessional conduct and under s.
449.18 (7), Stats., to require applicants for renewal to attend continuing education courses approved by the board.
Related statute or rule: There are no statutes or rules other than those listed above.
Plain language analysis:
SECTIONS 1 and 2. Under the current law, it is unprofessional conduct for an optometrist to fail to perform a minimum eye examination in certain instances. There are three exceptions to this provision in the current rules. In these rules, the board proposes to add a fourth exception which would permit an optometrist to perform a “limited eye screening" without having to perform a minimum eye examination. The proposed rules also include a definition of the term “limited eye screening."
SECTIONS 3 and 4. Under the current law, it is unprofessional conduct for an optometrist to fail to release, upon request by a patient and at no cost to the patient, a copy of the patient's contact lens prescription following release of the patient from contact lens fitting and initial follow-up care. In these rules, the board proposes to remove the language from the rules that conditions the release of a contact lens prescription upon a patient's request. This change is consistent with regulations recently adopted by the Federal Trade Commission.
SECTIONS 5 and 11. Under the current law, optometrists who hold certificates to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents are required to complete 30 hours of continuing education biennially in order to renew their certifications. The current law does not limit the number of continuing education hours that may be obtained through alternative delivery methods such as home-study courses, self-study packages, computer courses, televideo conferencing, or other delivery methods. In these rules, the board proposes to limit the number of hours that may be obtained through alternative delivery methods to 6 hours per biennium. One exception to this limitation would be in instances where certificate holders submit evidence of “hardship." The proposed rules include a definition of the term “hardship."
SECTIONS 6 and 8 repeal Notes.
SECTION 9 renumbers a subsection.
SECTION 10. Under the current law, the 30 hours of continuing education that optometrists who hold certificates to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents are required to complete biennially must relate to the diagnosis and management of eye disease or removal of superficial foreign bodies from the eye or from an appendage to the eye. In these rules, the board proposes to expand the subject matter of continuing education course work to include areas of practice that relate to the “practice of the profession of optometry" as defined in s.
449.01, Stats. Note that the board also proposes to limit the number of hours to six that may be claimed for subject matter that is not specifically related to the diagnosis and management of eye disease or removal of superficial foreign bodies from the eye or from an appendage to the eye.
SECTION 12. Under the current law, the 30 hours of continuing education that optometrists who hold certificates to use therapeutic pharmaceutical agents are required to complete biennially must relate to the diagnosis and management of eye disease or removal of superficial foreign bodies from the eye or from an appendage to the eye. In these rules, the board proposes to expand the subject matter of continuing education course work to include areas of practice that relate to the “practice of the profession of optometry" as defined in s.
449.01, Stats. Note that the board also proposes to limit the number of hours, to six, that may be claimed for subject matter that is not specifically related to the diagnosis and management of eye disease or removal of superficial foreign bodies from the eye or from an appendage to the eye.
SECTION 13 repeals a subsection.
SECTIONS 14 and 15. Under the current law, the board accepts continuing education course work approved by the Council on Optometric Practitioner Education (COPE). The law does not specify the subject matter of COPE courses that may be taken to satisfy the continuing education requirements. In these proposed rules, the board proposes to specify the subject matter of the COPE courses that may be taken to satisfy the continuing education requirements.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal regulation: The Federal Trade Commission requires a prescriber to provide a patient with a copy of a contact lens prescription when the prescriber completes a contact lens fitting, regardless of whether or not the patient makes a request for a copy of the prescription.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
Minnesota:
The rules specify that under 145.712 Requirements for contact lenses prescriptions. Subdivision 1. Copy of prescription. An optometrist or physician must provide a copy of the patient's prescription upon completion of the patient's eye examination and fitting. An optometrist or physician may refuse to give a patient a copy of the patient's prescription until after the patient has paid for the eye examination and fitting, but only if the optometrist or physician would have required immediate payment from that patient if the examination had revealed that no ophthalmic goods were required.
The rules appear to be silent as to performing a “limited eye screening."
The rules under CE requirements are silent as to any provision or exemptions regarding a “hardship," credit hour limitations in any specific topic or courses approved by COPE. Minnesota does have provisions for acceptable CE requirements and limitations including 40 hours of CE are required in a biennium, allows 15 credits of CE courses received from an alternative delivery method, no more than 8 credits in a biennium may be taken in an optometry related topic, and accept courses approved by Cope (Minnesota R 6500.0900 to 5400.1700).
Michigan:
The rules are silent as to performing a “limited eye screening" and Contact Lens Release.
The rules under CE requirements are silent as to any provision or exemptions regarding a “hardship" and CE courses received from an alternating delivery method. However, the rules do have provisions for acceptable CE requirements and limitations including 40 hours of CE are required in a biennium, no more than 8 credits in a biennium may be taken in an optometry related topic, and accept courses approved by Cope (Michigan R 338.256, 338.256a, 338.256b).
More may be found at:
Illinois:
The rules have a provision which is similar to that of the “limited eye screening" and is allowed under Illinois Rules Section 1320.1200 regarding Visual Screening: defined as a limited series of ocular observations, measurements or tests provided without a fee to determine if a complete eye examination, as described in Section 1320.90, by a licensed optometrist or a physician licensed to practice medicine in all of its branches, is recommended.
3) When a visual screening is performed, the recipient of the screening shall be clearly informed in writing and shall receive a copy of the following:
A) Results and limitations of the screening;
B) That the screening is not representative of or a substitute for an eye exam;
C) That the screening will not result in a prescription for visual correction:
D) That visual screening referral criteria for a complete eye examination must meet accepted optometric professional standards criteria; and
E) The name and address of the charitable organization sponsoring the screening and the chairperson of the supervisory committee.
The rules appear to be silent as to the release of contact lens prescriptions.
The rules under CE requirements are silent regarding CE courses received from an alternative delivery method, courses offered by COPE (with the exception of out-of-state CE courses), and maximum CE credits per topic in a biennium. However, the rules do have provisions for receiving a waiver for CE requirements in cases of Hardship and 24 hours of CE are required in a biennium.
Iowa:
The rules appear to be silent as to performing a “limited eye screening."
The rules have a provision under Iowa Rules Chapter 182.3 (2) for the release of contact lens prescription stating: After the contact lenses have been adequately adapted and the patient released from initial follow-up care by the prescribing practitioner, the prescribing practitioner shall, upon request of the patient, provide a copy of the contact lens prescription, at no cost, for the duplication of the original contact lens.
The rules under CE courses received from an alternative delivery method, and CE credit limits per topic, with the exception of Ocular Disease (20 hours per biennium). The rules do specify an exception for a hardship under Iowa's Rule Chapters
645—181.9(154,272C) Continuing education exemption for disability or illness. The board may, in individual cases involving disability or illness, grant exemptions of the minimum continuing education requirements or extension of time within which to fulfill the same or make the required reports. Iowa also accepts courses approved by Cope.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
No study resulting in the collection of factual data was used in reference to this rule-making effort. The primary methodology for revising the rule is the board's ongoing analysis and determination that a rule change is necessary.
Determination of significant fiscal effect on the private sector:
The department finds that this rule has no significant fiscal effect on the private sector.
Fiscal estimate
The proposed rule will have minimal impact on the department's funds.
Effect on small business
