Formal Feedback - PRK Procedure Experience
I am providing…read morefeedback on my recent PRK procedure experience, which fell significantly short in terms of coordination, consistency, and overall patient care.
To begin, I was very concerned to find there is no onsite physician available for most patient interactions. The majority of care appears to be handled by office staff (whose clinical qualifications were not clearly communicated). While the staff was friendly and courteous throughout my visits, it is clear they are being placed in a position where they are expected to manage clinical responsibilities without adequate support or direct physician presence. This ultimately sets both staff and patients up for a poor experience.
My only pre-procedure consultation was conducted via video with a doctor who was not performing my surgery. This approach felt disconnected and did not provide sufficient opportunity for meaningful discussion or informed decision-making. On the day of the procedure, my interaction with the physician was extremely brief and did not allow time for thorough questions or consideration.
Prior to seeing the doctor, I was given instructions and Tylenol PM by front desk staff. This felt inappropriate and non-clinical, especially compared to my previous PRK experience in 2014, which included more direct physician involvement and comprehensive preparation.
During the procedure, I repeatedly communicated significant anxiety and sensitivity related to eye contact. Despite this, no effort was made to offer additional support or medication to address anxiety. Only numbing drops were provided, which did nothing to address the level of distress I experienced. There was no discussion or offer of options such as a mild sedative, which I later learned is commonly provided in other practices.
The lack of coordination became more apparent during follow-up:
I called the day before to confirm whether I needed a driver and was explicitly told I did not.
I also proactively raised concerns about a severe storm and asked whether appointments were being adjusted, but staff were unable to provide clear guidance.
The following morning, while already en route, I received a call just 15 minutes before my appointment stating the office would not open until 1:00 PM. This was extremely frustrating given my attempt to plan ahead.
At my follow-up visit, there was again no onsite physician. The removal of the protective contact lens was attempted by staff, which was particularly difficult given I had clearly expressed my anxiety and lack of experience with contacts. The first attempt was unsuccessful. When I requested numbing drops, the staff had to seek permission from a doctor via video. Even after numbing, the process was extremely painful and distressing.
I also encountered serious inconsistencies in medication instructions, which is unacceptable:
I was initially given a detailed steroid drop regimen:
Day 1: every 15 minutes
Week 1: 4 times per day
Week 2: 3 times per day
Week 4: once per day
At my follow-up, the doctor told me these were "old instructions" and instead directed me to take the drops only twice daily until finished.
This level of conflicting guidance creates confusion and potential risk. If protocols have changed, patient materials and staff instructions must be updated immediately to ensure consistency.
There was also a clear lack of communication across providers. During my follow-up, the physician asked why PRK was chosen instead of LASIK, indicating that my case had not been reviewed in advance. This raised serious concerns about how patient records are being managed and whether care is coordinated at all.
Additionally, I was informed during the follow-up that my vision was 20/50 and did not meet the 20/40 requirement for driving--directly contradicting what I had been told the day before when I was advised a driver was not necessary. This placed me in a potentially unsafe situation that could have been avoided with accurate guidance.
Overall, the experience was disjointed, impersonal, and lacked the level of clinical oversight expected for a surgical procedure. Had I known this was the care model--including limited physician access, reliance on virtual consultations, inconsistent medication instructions, and poor communication--I would not have proceeded at this location.
For comparison, a family member recently had the same procedure at another practice and received a significantly higher level of care, including:
An in-person consultation with the operating physician
Antibiotic drops started 3 days prior to the procedure
Medication support (Valium during the procedure and Ambien for recovery)
Clear, consistent, and coordinated care instructions
I am sharing this feedback with the expectation that your organization will take a serious look at its patient care model, improve communication and coordination, and ensure that both patients and staff are adequately supported moving forward.
