AK Optometry Jurisprudence study materials
AK Optometry Jurisprudence study resources

Corneal Abrasion and the Limits of Prescriptive Authority

AK Optometry Jurisprudence · Put your knowledge to work in context.

All case studies

Corneal Abrasion and the Limits of Prescriptive Authority

A 34-year-old soft contact lens wearer presents on a Friday afternoon with a 2-mm central corneal abrasion after sleeping in lenses. Visual acuity is 20/40 in the affected eye, there is no infiltrate, and the anterior chamber is quiet. The optometrist debrides the loose epithelium, instills fluorescein, and considers prescribing topical moxifloxacin four times daily, a cycloplegic at bedtime, and oral oxycodone 5 mg every 6 hours for pain. The patient asks for “something strong” because he has a camping trip Saturday. The optometrist has no ophthalmologist available until Monday. The clinic’s standing order says “refer all central abrasions.”

1. Which of the proposed prescriptions are within Alaska optometric practice, and which present a scope or standard-of-care problem? Explain the distinction.

Read the worked answer

Alaska law gives optometrists therapeutic prescriptive authority under board rules, but authority is not an obligation to prescribe. Topical moxifloxacin and a cycloplegic are standard, within-scope treatments for a noninfected corneal abrasion in a contact lens wearer; the antibiotic reduces bacterial risk, and the cycloplegic relieves ciliary spasm. Oral oxycodone is the problem. A Schedule II opioid for a 2-mm abrasion is not supported by the standard of care: it does not speed healing, can mask a developing ulcer, and creates diversion and safety issues. The better course is oral acetaminophen or an NSAID, explicit red-flag warnings, and a 24-hour follow-up. The clinic’s standing order to refer all central abrasions is also a control on practice: a central abrasion over the visual axis in a contact lens wearer carries a higher risk of scarring and infection. The optometrist may deviate only with documented clinical reasoning and a clear follow-up plan; otherwise, arrange same-day or next-day ophthalmology. The key judgment is risk stratification, not whether the drug appears on a formulary.

2. What follow-up, patient instruction, and documentation plan would best protect the patient and the licensee?

Read the worked answer

Follow-up should occur within 24 hours, sooner if pain or vision worsens. Instruct the patient to stop all lens wear, avoid patching because of Pseudomonas risk, and not sleep in lenses. Document the abrasion’s size, location, depth, fluorescein uptake, visual acuity, anterior chamber, lids, and lens status. Document why an opioid was refused and what alternative was offered, because a board will ask whether the patient’s pain was addressed appropriately. Note the standing-order deviation and the clinical rationale for it. Arrange ophthalmology backup and give after-hours contact instructions. If the patient cannot return because of the camping trip, refer before he leaves; a central abrasion can worsen quickly. Contemporaneous, factual documentation protects the licensee because complaints often turn on whether red flags, alternatives, and follow-up were recognized and recorded, not simply on the final diagnosis.