Calvin Klein model CK23503S

It is perhaps interesting to consider how the company’s current model will translate to the North American market, which is often looked on with some reverence by UK-based clinicians. For instance, setting appropriate pricing for clinical examinations, with a far greater emphasis on the eye health part of the consultation where dilations are performed as a matter of routine. Will the North American market see a similar shift towards less chair time and a growth in lossleading reduced clinical fees?

Dr Mani Herold has been announced as the Rodenstock Group’s new chief financial officer (CFO), succeeding Marcus Desimoni. Joining the company from the Pfleiderer Group, Dr Herold has more than 25 years of international work experience in the area of strategic and operational financial management, and holds a PhD and a MBA from the University of Munich.

Marcus Desimoni, CEO of Rodenstock, said: “We are pleased to welcome with Dr Herold a well-rounded finance leader to our Rodenstock management team. The breadth of his experience and his leadership skills will allow him to play a decisive role in the future transformational path of the Rodenstock Group.” Dr Herold added: “I am excited joining the Rodenstock Group. With its unique biometric positioning of Rodenstock paired with the ambitious environment of a PE company it is perfectly positioned for future growth.”

The North American and European markets tend to split the clinical and dispensing elements, which is a controversial topic in the midst of the review into the Opticians Act. Would splitting the examination and dispense see a change in mentality towards eye examinations, appropriate clinical fees and a lesser dependence upon spectacle sales? Might allowing dispensing opticians to refract open up clinic time for optometrists, enabling them to more widely utilise their clinical skills to help our over-stretched hospital eye service? Could the ability to refract help to bolster the role of the dispensing optician, which has gradually been eroded by the rise of the non-qualified optical assistant?

There are compelling arguments for both sides of this debate – and it remains perhaps the thorniest of issues surrounding the review of the Opticians Act. Is it a case of ‘better the devil you know’, or should we be aiming to give the profession its much needed shake-up in this rapidly changing world?

The Professional Standards Authority for Health and Social Care (PSA) has published its review of the General Optical Council’s (GOC) performance in 2021-2022. This year, for the first time in just under a decade, the GOC has met all 18 of the PSA’s Standards of Good Regulation. The GOC was deemed to have performed well in several areas

including: the improvements made to the time it takes to progress cases through its fitness to practise system; and in equality, diversity, and inclusion (EDI), including the comprehensive registrant EDI data the GOC holds and collects as part of its annual public perceptions survey.

Though much was positive, the GOC said it would reflect on comments relating to the stakeholder communications in the implementation of its new Education and Training Requirements and the new CPD system. GOC chief executive and registrar, Leonie Milliner, said: “I am delighted with the outcome of the PSA’s annual review of our performance from October 2021 to December 2022. The GOC meeting all the PSA’s Standards for Good Regulation is a significant step in our ambition to become a world-class regulator and we will continue to build on this positive performance.”

GO BEYOND WITH THE MOST

LENS Discover more: www.ultraoneday.co.uk UOD.0002.IE.23