Assessment File

Introduction

In May 1994 a working party was established to prepare this "Assessment file". It met in Paris in November 1994 where its aims were defined, and where the general lay-out of the file was decided. We then asked each member country to send us exact information about the legal requirements regarding orthoptic curricula and practice of the profession in their countries. In addition, we also asked what the various orthoptic training schools actually offer. The data for each country were collected by mail and additional specifications were obtained in the course of two subsequent meetings of the Liaison Committee. The document was entirely updated in the course of 1998-1999. After the final approval of the Liaison Committee on May 5, 2000, the updated version was published on July 1, 2000.

Results

We asked for the official legal texts which are applied to orthoptic training and practice. Where these were available they kindly provided.

In 9 countries the practice of the profession and the orthoptic training are regulated. These countries are: Germany, France, Portugal, United Kingdom, Holland, Italy, Sweden, Austria, Belgium;
In Luxemburg, the orthoptic title is recognized as a 'health profession', but the orthoptic practice is not regulated. There is no orthoptic training centre in this country;
In Norway and Ireland the orthoptic practice is regulated, although there are no orthoptic training centres in these countries;
In Denmark, Finland, Spain and Greece there are no regulations concerning orthoptic practice or training.

"Areas recommended for comparison"

The Liaison Committee is fully aware of the fact that its role is purely advisory and that it can only offer recommendations on the practice of orthoptics in the EU. Nevertheless, in the interest of the quality of orthoptic practice it is hoped that some uniformity in assessment of candidates for immigration can be reached. To this end, the working party developed the concept of "areas recommended for comparison" and based the lay-out for the data concerning legal requirements for orthoptic training and practice upon this concept. The topics mentioned in this lay-out reflect the ideas of the working party on the desired contents of orthoptic training programmes. It will be noted that this general outline is already followed in a large majority of the member countries.

This lay-out was also extensively discussed and subsequently accepted at a general meeting of the Liaison Committee (1995). We stress that this "list of areas recommended for comparison" (and its annex containing further clarification of the terminology used) can only be considered as an expression of the Committee's ideas on this subject, and should by no means be considered as limiting or restrictive.

Presentation

The data obtained are presented in two sections:

A first section lists the names and addresses of the various educational establishments and of the recognized qualifications in each country.
Secondly, we present the information on the legal requirements for orthoptic training and practice for each country, with reference to the afore-mentioned list of recommended areas of comparison.

Circulation and access

The information in this report will be used by the O.C.E. in discussions with EU institutions. It may be used by O.C.E. member organizations in discussion with their health and education ministries and other statutory or professional authorities and officials concerned with orthoptic education and migration of orthoptists.

Members of the working party

Mireille Louly, France - Chris Timms, United Kingdom - Lyviana Hettrich, Germany - Alice van Rooy, Holland, under chairmanship of Mirjam van Lammeren, Belgium.
The working party wish to express their thanks to all OCE member organizations for their kind participation.
Address of correspondence for the Assessment File": Mirjam van Lammeren, Bierbeekstraat 14, 3001 Heverlee, Belgium.

Areas recommended for comparison

First and foremost, It should be established that completion of the course of study under examination leads to professional qualification and license to practice in the country of study.

If so, it is recommended that the points mentioned below should be compared:
I Education
I.1 Pre-entry requirements
I.2 Course-length
I.3 Course contents
I.3.a AREAS OF STUDY:
Classification, aetiology, investigation and management in the following areas:

Binocular vision
- normal binocular vision
- defects of binocular vision
Amblyopia
Comitant strabismus
Incomitant strabismus
Accommodation/convergence
Nystagmus
Rehabilitation
- Low Vision
- neurophysiological disturbances

Sufficient knowledge of the following basic sciences

Anatomy and physiology
- general anatomy and physiology
- specific anatomy and physiology
Visual development and visual function
Optics
- basic optical principles
- physiological optics
General pathology
Ocular pathology
Neurology and neuro-ophthalmology
Paediatric ophthalmology
Electro physiology
Pharmacology
Orthoptic apparatus and procedures
Ophthalmological apparatus and procedures
Human sciences
Other subjects

I.3.b Clinical training

Clinical training is required in all aspects of the course. It is recommended the percentage of time spent on clinical training is stated.This allows comparison between the migrants- and the host country's

I.3.c Method of assessment

Formal assessment of the students performance in both clinical and theoretical skills is required. It is recommended that the methods of assessment used in the migrant- and host countries are compared.

II Orthoptic experience

III Evidence of continuing professional development