Citizen Portal
Sign In

Lifetime Citizen Portal Access — AI Briefings, Alerts & Unlimited Follows

Get Lifetime Access

Optometrists propose stricter training guardrails as substitute SB36 seeks expanded procedural authority

Senate Health Committee · March 4, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Ohio optometry advocates told the Senate Health Committee a substitute to SB36 raises training standards and precepted clinical requirements while explicitly forbidding optometrists from administering vaccines or performing certain intraocular injections; proponents said the changes are intended to protect patient safety while expanding access.

Representatives of the Ohio Optometric Association and the American Optometric Association urged the Senate Health Committee to approve substitute Senate Bill 36, saying the revised language raises training and supervision standards for optometrists seeking authority to perform certain laser and minor procedures.

Gossard (Ohio Optometric Association) said the substitute elevates training "beyond those contained in the as introduced version" and ties precepted hands-on case requirements to residency-level minimums. The substitute requires supervised precepted training that mirrors standards for ophthalmology residents and sets minimum counts for procedures such as YAG capsulotomies and iridotomies.

Witnesses emphasized patient safety guardrails in the bill: "Optometrists will not administer vaccines under this bill, intravenous injections, or injections directly into the globe of the eye," the testimony said. The witnesses added that the Ohio Vision Professionals Board would be responsible for implementing updated duties and oversight to ensure safe practice.

Committee members asked whether this substitute represents the best compromise and whether it responds to safety concerns raised earlier; proponents said they had worked with the committee to include protections, but had not reached agreement with ophthalmology stakeholders on every point.

The hearing record includes written testimony submitted by the witnesses; the committee concluded the session without a recorded vote during this meeting.