19 October 2017
The consumer watchdog, Which?, has cast its spotlight once again on the quality of service offered by optometrists. And, on the face of it, the results paint a gloomy picture – but is the methodology as robust as it could be?
The headline claim being made is that “two out of five eye tests are not up to scratch.”
To arrive at this conclusion, Which? sent its team of “fieldworkers” into multiple and independent practices with the goal of assessing the quality of the sight test received.
Before visiting the practices in question, each fieldworker had eye examinations by two optometrists, who agreed on their findings.
The Which? report’s conclusion was that many sight test assessments fell short, highlighting inaccurate prescriptions, important tests that were missed, and failures to warn about health risks.
The sector’s response to the probe has been reflective rather than defensive. Having spoken to the multiples for their reaction to the findings, they told OT that it is critical to learn lessons where possible – and have asked Which? for more insight into the data.
This response feels right, but as with many secret shopper exposé, the process is not without its flaws; and it is important to not get carried away.
For one thing, the study is not extensive: 30 practices were under investigation. Compare this to the Which? 2016 report, which used data from thousands of its members – and suggested a significant level of satisfaction from consumers.
It is also fair to ask why Which? has conducted the piece without seeking advice from the expert professional bodies in the sector.
The General Optical Council has said: “As the national regulator of the optical professions, we take very seriously any research that raises concerns about public protection.”
OT understands that the regulator has already contacted Which? to obtain further details of the report “to assess the concerns raised and take any regulatory action that might be appropriate.”
One key message from the National Eye Health Week campaign was to energise the public about the wealth of knowledge and expertise offered by optometrists. And the danger of the Which? report is that it discourages members of the public from booking their next sight test appointment.
As optometrist and clinical director at the AOP, Dr Peter Hampson, notes, it is important to find ways to stress to the public the robust level of regulation that already governs the sector, not to mention the passion of practitioners serving patients day in and out.
“All registered optometrists and dispensing opticians are governed by set Standards of Practice to ensure patient care remains at the centre of their professional practice. Findings from our 2017 survey into the wellbeing of UK optometrists indicates that many within the profession have a deep sense of accountability and diligence.”
Advertisement
Comments (4)
You must be logged in to join the discussion. Log in
Anonymous20 October 2017
20 minutes to do a sight test, "customer" never on time but must be seen so 10 minutes to do a sight test otherwise the next "customer" complains about waiting and your head office then criticises you for not doing your job and their "customer feedback" score suffering... What do they expect when the job has been ridiculed and idiots put in charge?
Report Like 211
sgill19 October 2017
'Since our humble beginnings in a Bethnal Green garage 60 years ago, we've been testing products, asking questions and championing the rights of all consumers.' That's a quote from their website. Notice the word 'consumers'. In the testing room you are a patient, not a consumer. So go away and get back to your humble beginnings because you clearly have no idea what you are talking about. This is evidenced by the fact that you can apparently refer to a prescription as being 'accurate'. Fools.
Report Like 205
Anonymous19 October 2017
Newspaper reports of the Which survey repeatedly refer to "inaccurate" prescriptions given to the undercover "patients", set against a supposed gold standard prescription arrived at by their " expert opticians". This reflects a fundamental lack of understanding of what a refraction prescription is. To be wearable, and satisfactory to the patient, it is more important for it to be acceptable than to be accurate and may not be wearable. This flaw needs to be highlighted in the profession's public response.
Report Like 195
Jules6619 October 2017
When will they ever stop having a go at our profession??
Report Like 209