In this inaugural episode of the podcast series Clinical Trials Spotlight, host Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO, is joined by Shane Kannarr, OD, and Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD, to discuss their unique journeys into clinical vision research. Drawing from their personal experiences, the conversation explores the many pathways into clinical research, from formal research training and graduate education to practice-based clinical trials. The guests also share practical advice for clinicians interested in research and discuss how clinical trials are driving the future of eye care.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Welcome to Clinical Trials Spotlight, the podcast where innovation, research, and patient care come into focus. I’m Andrew Pucker, Chief Development Officer at Mintra Health and your host for this series exploring the latest developments in optometry and ophthalmology clinical trials. Each episode, we’ll sit down with leading clinicians, researchers, industry experts, and innovators shaping the future of eye care. From emerging innovations in study design, patient outcomes, and regulatory insights, we’ll take you behind the scenes of the clinical research transforming optometry and ophthalmology.
Whether you’re a clinician, researcher, industry professional, or simply passionate about advancing vision science; this podcast is designed to bring you thoughtful conversations and practical insights from across the ophthalmology and optometry community. Clinical Trials Spotlight is co-produced by Mintra Health and Ophthalmology 360 and Optometry 360. Thank you for joining us. Let’s get started.
In today’s episode, we explore getting into clinical vision research and the people who help advance patient care through clinical trials. Today, we’re joined by 2 outstanding guests, first is Dr. Shane Kannarr. Shane is an optometrist and the founder of Eye Research Associates, which is an optometric research site network. Shane is an experienced clinical investigator who has been involved in numerous ophthalmic clinical trials helping bring innovative treatments and technologies from research into practice.
We’re also joined today by Dr. Katherine Bickle, an optometrist and researcher with a PhD who has a span of both clinical and scientific investigations. Katherine and I actually were graduate students together while at Ohio State. She’s in private practice with her father in Granville, Ohio, where they together run above 5 clinical trials at a time. Her unique perspective bridges patient care and research, providing valuable insights into how clinicians can become involved in advancing the field through clinical studies.
Together, they’ll share their experiences, pathways into clinical research, and offer advice for clinicians interested in becoming part of the future of eye care research. Let’s welcome our guests today and kind of get into it.
How did you all get into research, and why really you think it’s important? With that, maybe Katherine, you could maybe first talk about how you became involved in clinical research.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Sure. I actually first became involved in clinical research just prior to starting optometry school. I was fortunate to do a summer internship for a major contact lens manufacturer in the research clinic. I got that perspective from the industry side and then entered optometry school. At Ohio State, we were fortunate that they did have a research focus at that College of Optometry and I participated in a T35 summer research program, then went on to do a combined OD/MS program and later PhD program. I first became pretty early on involved within my career and really happy I did.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine is clearly really good at school, and she kind of took what I think of as more of a traditional approach to getting into research. Shane, I think you’ve had a different experience. Can you go through how you’ve gotten into research as more of a traditional clinician?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Yeah. Early on, probably about 3 years into my career, I was approached by a company about doing a marketing study. We can talk more about that, but very easy, low hanging fruit. That study really shaped something for me because what I assumed was right was incorrect when I started surveying patients about their satisfactions and their outcomes. I started wondering how much that does happen.
Really did 5 or 6 marketing studies, really kind of got my feet wet. The biggest thing I remember is learning the terminology: what’s a CRO? That was the opening. Then there was actually a phase 3 study that a contact lens manufacturer was struggling to get enrollment in. They reached out to me, and that was like drinking from a fire hose. It was a big experience and such a transition. I really enjoyed it. From there, it’s really evolved where I think I shape patient care in my clinic because I am involved in studies.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Shane, it sounds like you weren’t initially thinking about research in optometry school, just kind of happened one day and you kind of ran with it.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I think at UMSL, we did not have a research focus or a pathway. The Ohio State obviously does, and I really wasn’t exposed to it to the level. I may talk about it a little bit later, but I also had, outside of eye care, a personal experience that really piqued my interest in research and then really let me see what those outcomes could be and the benefit to patients. I think all that together just came at the right time.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine, what was your first project and what did you learn from it? Do you remember that?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Probably it was back towards my T35 program. We were trying to assess how lipid deposition on contact lenses related to contact lens discomfort in patients. We had patients using different multipurpose solutions. We took the lenses off, we analyzed them in the lab and quantified the lipid deposits and then did clinical assessments as well. I did that training under other optometrists at Ohio State.
I think I learned from that experience and what has helped me in research is you find where your strengths and your interests really are. I love working with patients. I love speaking with patients. I love working with the sponsors. Sitting in a laboratory with test tubes and equipment probably isn’t my biggest strength that I do have. I think early on I could really learn how I wanted to tailor the research that I did, the projects that I would agree to be on were much more clinically focused. I think it was a good project and taught me a lot of different skills, but really where my passion was for pursuing my research interests in the future.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
That is a great point. Bench research is entirely different than medical research.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Yes, it is. Very much so. Thank goodness for the great lab technicians at Ohio State.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Love people that want to do that, but I am not in that mode here.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Me either.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
My first project was studying the mouse mammary tumor virus at the University of Chicago and I hated it. I spent all my waking hours looking at other careers because I just didn’t want to be a lab tech my whole life. I found optometry. At that point I was like, I’m done with research. Then I found this combined program that Katherine mentioned that did clinical research and I loved it. Maybe the point is: if your first project is not for you, maybe try another one.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
That is a really good point because I think that does steer people away from research who would be excellent researchers in the optometric field because they get one exposure to one very specific type of research and think that’s how it is among all different types. There’s so many options available in research to meet so many people’s interests and passions.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
That’s a great point.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Yeah. Shane, I know you’re both busy, but Shane, you’re really busy. You’re working with advisory boards. Why do you continue to do research? Why is it rewarding to you? Why do you think everyone in optometry should maybe do this?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Everything that it comes back to for me, and really what we built our practice on, is providing the highest level of care we can to our patients. I think when you’re doing research, not only are you thinking about the future, but you may be better able to position a patient for a treatment coming in the future. I think that’s vital. I think with that, you become more aware of disease state, you become more aware of current treatments available, and where they work and where their shortcomings may be.
For me, it all ties it together. By being involved in research, I provide the best level of patient care. I also have the most job satisfaction because I think the more engaged I am and the more I’m thinking through each patient, the more I enjoy every day I have. All that comes together to me and I’m in a career I just love.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
That’s awesome. Katherine, is that kind of what does it for you or do you have anything else?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
No, I think Shane said it beautifully. You’re exactly right. Every day, the equipment we have, the studies we work on, it is to provide the highest and best level of care that we can for our patients. Our role as optometrist ultimately is to best care for our patients. I think our patients realize that as well. That wasn’t my primary interest was to build the practice, but we have had patients come to our practice saying, “We came here because we read your website and saw you were involved with research. We knew you were always staying on the frontline and educating yourselves and pushing the profession forward.”
That’s very rewarding to see how engaged the patients are and how much they appreciate what we’re doing. Then I think they take the studies more seriously and provide better data for the companies as well because they realize that new treatments may be able to become available based upon these studies, new devices for patients. They understand the process of how that contact lens gets from initial inception to them being fit in the clinical practice.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
It’s kind of cool to see from the beginning. It’s coming to you first, and you get to give the company some advice on what you see. Then I think you can sometimes continue the relationship. If you help bring something to market, maybe you do some lectures for that company. Kind of going with that, Katherine, what are some of the downstream benefits that you think you might get from doing these studies?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
I think it allows us to meet people within the company so you can get those opportunities like you spoke about. I think as well, what I find really rewarding as well is that our patients recognize that we are so heavily invested in providing them with the best care. Those downstream benefits are our patients feel very comfortable in the care that we’re providing. They trust us, and then they tell their other family and friends about it.
That we know what’s coming down the pipeline as well. Hopefully if there’s a patient where there’s not the treatment option available, they need now, that we hope that there will be in the near future for them. We’ve seen some patients who have participated in studies with devices, drugs that aren’t yet approved. When they do get approval, the patients can come back in and then receive that treatment or be fit in that contact lens. That’s very rewarding to see as well, that they actually get to experience what they help bring to market.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Shane, you have 2 practices. What does your day-to-day life look like as an optometrist seeing patients and also doing research?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
It’s busy in a good way. I may have some attention deficit disorder to be honest. The reality is people do it 2 different ways. Some people block schedule, and I’m doing research here and I’m seeing clinic here. I’ve done it a little bit different where I intermingle the 2, and I think it adds a lot of variety to my day. I think it’s being able to lock into what you’re doing, and I’m seeing this patient for this reason or I’m following this protocol and I need to do things sequentially based on the protocol, not the way I might normally do them in clinic.
It’s busy, but I think it’s very intermingled. It allows for variety, it allows for routine, and it allows for the opportunity to stay engaged in what I’m doing. It does require being busy. I think trying to think of your question, I think that the biggest thing that you have to be willing to do is focus on what that task is at hand, not get too bogged down by the other things.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
It probably varies from week to week, but what percentage of your week do you think you spend on research?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
That’s growing. I would say now it’s around 30% to 40% of my days are on research. When I first started, it was 95% not research, 5% research and it’s just continued to grow. I’m 54. I think as I continue to move throughout my career, I see it shifting more and more to research, just because I think it’s an opportunity for me to give back to the profession, give back to my patients, that kind of has a legacy reward for me.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine, how about you? You said before we got on the call here that your practice had virtually no research until you came back with your PhD. Tell us how that worked. How did you build this up, and now how much research are you doing each week?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Sure, absolutely. When I came back to join the practice with my father and our other associate, we were not doing research at the office, but it was an interest for me from my background. I had worked with some of the sponsors that we work with now at the academic institutions I trained at. I was able to develop relationships with them. I think that they could see the dedication I put in, the time I put in, the commitment I had, and that allowed us the opportunity to bring them to our practices. Right now we work with several different sponsors. We do some short-term studies. We’re doing some 3-, 4-year studies as well at the practice. We have a lot of variety within the practice.
My setup is a little different. The other 2 doctors in our practice handle almost all of our non-study patients, or our regular patients, where I handle almost all of our regular patients. Most of my day is spent seeing our research participants in our studies. When I am not doing that, my fellowship was in the cornea contact lens world. I do handle our keratoconus, our post-graft patients, fit a lot of GP lenses, a lot of referrals from other doctors. Those are my non-study patients that I see. Most of my day though is spent seeing our study patients, but a wide range. We have 6-year-olds in studies and we have 75-year-olds in studies. I do like that variety that I see there even within the research schedule that we do have.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Your 2 experiences seem to kind of match with what I’ve seen at the contract research organization level. You have to have some way to get the patients in your study. You need to have some doctors seeing patients in your practice, or maybe someone right down the street who you have a really good collaboration with, and then you can have the research time as well. It’s pretty rare to have just a research practice, from what I can see. You kind of have to stay involved in both, but maybe like Katherine, you can have multiple doctors in your practice, but you’re doing the research and they’re doing the day-to-day stuff.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely. We can work really well together because for some of our studies where recruitment may be a little more challenging, when one of the other doctors identifies a potential patient, they can grab me and then I can walk in and I can talk to the patient. Because think particularly when we run with pediatric studies, you have a parent and a child involved, and it’s just a different level of thinking that parents have when getting their children involved with research. Being able to sit down and introduce myself and start building that relationship I think really helps before they even enroll in the study.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I think one thing that maybe differentiates our practice a little bit, and goes back to the question you asked me about private practice, and to do research the way I do it, I really need a strong study coordinator or three that can do some of the detail to allow me time to be in general clinic. Katherine, I think is probably more hands-on with the regulatory binder and some of those pieces where I have really well-trained staff that allow me to do that and just provide oversight to those. I think it’s 2 different ways to do it, both which are great, but I think having the proper people in place to build your team is huge if you’re going to succeed and move forward.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine, how many study coordinators do you have?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
I have 1 primary study coordinator that actually used to work with our regular patients and then expressed an interest for research. She’s been with me for a few years now and is phenomenal. We’ve trained some optometry students who have served as more technicians than true study coordinators for us over the years. Then we do have 2 backup coordinators that work more on a part-time basis with me as well.
Shane, you couldn’t be more right. One of the areas I think is so important for optometrists to understand when they’re starting in this world is developing that good staff, that good foundation with you. Because you cannot do it all, and that staff is so vital to your success in the clinical research world of optometry.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
I think that from the CRO side, if you did not have a study coordinator, we may not even consider you as a site because there’s things that need to happen in addition to what the doctor’s doing. You may have to have some masked drug in a study and they may need to help dispense that. Just 1 example.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
I think there is some investment upfront if you want to get into research, and that could be your tech from your regular practice who you teach how to do this, but they do need to have some level of training and experience, I think.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
We have 4 study coordinators; each take lead on certain studies. But all have, and I think we’re pretty, all have come through our practice and worked as a tech. I think you need that foundation, and then you can identify the person and move them forward. I think the personality of that person, you can tell people who are going to have the attention to detail, the interest in doing it. That’s kind of the washout period. Then we identify that person and move them to the next level. Or shouldn’t say next level, next position. Yes.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine and I had a mentor who used to say FFP. I’m not going to say what that stands for here, but you do need to follow the protocol and if you don’t, you can’t do research.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
I think I know who you’re talking about, and that still resonates with me even now today.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I’m pretty sure I can figure out that acronym.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
We’ve kind of talked about this a little bit, Shane, but what do you need as an optometrist to get started in research? Do you need any research skills, or how do you get your foot in the door from your perspective?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I think you need to have a willingness to be committed and willingness to spend time learning the vocabulary. I hate to say you need to have a little bit of a thick skin, but just entering a new field, you need to have that. Honestly, I think as optometry continues to evolve in research, I’ve definitely came up against barriers because I’m not an ophthalmologist and you have to be willing to take that with a smile on your face. I always use the phrase, which drives my staff and my family nuts, but it’s positive pressure. All I can do is show them I can do it better. I can let it roll off my skin and continue to push forward. I think you have to be willing to do that.
I think the worst thing that you can do is enter into research because you think there’s financial incentive, and that’s the only reason you’re doing it. Because I can tell you, you will burn out and you will not perform well. You have to have an interest and a desire outside of that. I’m not saying research can’t be financially rewarding, but if that’s your primary driver, it’s just not worth it. You have to have that engagement at a different level.
Having the right team, the right people available. As you start, identifying a staff member and bringing them forward with you is key. Because you’re so right, Andrew. Every time we fill out a feasibility study, they ask, “Do you have a dedicated study coordinator?” I’m pretty sure if you say no, it goes in the shred bin. You need to bring the right person with you from the beginning and be committed to developing them as well.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Yeah. I think in some instances, optometry is the go to for the research study. Contact lenses come to mind specifically. I know that there are ophthalmologists who fit contact lens, but really optometry is the leader in that field. I think in that instance, we should be leading the research. Or dry eye. There’s ophthalmology and optometry in that field. We’re both leaders and I think we should be both doing that sort of thing.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I think exactly those things, but we can also talk about anti-infectives. We can talk about a myriad of other drugs, whether it’s treatment for presbyopia. I would challenge retinal disease as we’re moving earlier in the disease process. Currently, they’re studying an oral to look at delaying the onset of macular edema in patients with background diabetic retinopathy. Well, a retina specialist doesn’t have tons of patients with background diabetic retinopathy. We need to position ourselves as we treat diseases earlier, frontline where we’re at, we’re going to have the patient base to develop those products and bring them to market. Honestly, in a cost-effective way. I think we have to position ourselves to move forward with that.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Totally agree. If you look at it from the FDA standpoint, they only care about making sure that you have the knowledge to be able to do the research. It’s not related to are you an MD? Are you an OD? Are you a dentist? Any of that. It’s do you have the knowledge? I always kind of get hung up on sometimes a sponsor will say, “Hey, what if it’s a serious adverse event, something really bad that happened?” I guess would you ever see an ophthalmologist treating a broken leg? No. They’re going to refer them to the hospital.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Talk about a study was hesitating to include me, and one of their arguments was, what if the subject would have a heart attack? Well, I had a cardiologist I know write a letter stating if a patient in his office had a heart attack, he would do CPR, give them an aspirin, and call 911 or hook them to a defibrillator. He’s not prepared to do anything else. Those are the exact same steps I would take. That argument is asinine, for lack of a better word. Ophthalmologists, while they have a different level of training with systemic disease, it’s not applicable to what we’re treating. If your drug is so dangerous that you’re causing a huge number of heart attacks during the clinical trial, then maybe don’t bring it to market.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Awesome. I won’t dwell on that. We all have our spots. Ophthalmologists are maybe better at cataract surgery, which I’m not trained to do at least. It’s just a team effort, I guess I want to say. We’re all important and we need to do it together. We need to work together. I think it’s only good for both of us.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
I couldn’t agree more. Absolutely. I think Shane brought up a good point that we have different patient populations. Those earlier-on diabetic retinopathy patients, those are who we’re going to be seeing, but having that good collaboration with more of those severe patients that may require some type of surgery I think’s really important. Another area I think we do really well, and it’s really exploding in our area, is the myopia control. I think something we can make a huge impact on for generations to come in terms of how we treat these children.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Katherine, what sort of skills do you think as an optometrist really lend well to clinical research?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
I think some of the things that Shane mentioned in terms of what he’s looking for with his coordinators, the attention to detail, the dedication that you have, it’s extremely important. Doing a slit lamp exam on a 16-year-old patient you’ve seen for 5 years is very different than doing a slit lamp exam potentially on a research patient that you’re seeing where they’re grading hyperemia bulbar versus limbal in all 4 quadrants. We’re probably, in our patient charts of our regular patients, we’re seeing not doing grade 1 bulbar nasal hyperemia and grade 0.5 superiorly.
Having that dedication, that attention to detail. Having good, strong clinical skills. I think I am a better optometrist from doing the studies. Because in the studies we are grading with some studies on a 0.5 scale, and we’re looking at each quadrant. Now, when I’m seeing that regular patient, I’m looking for lid wiper epitheliopathy more because I was just grading it in a study.
My attention to detail is better there as well. I think a lot of the skills that we learn in school that we practice every day do apply very well, but I think a doctor who is looking to get involved with research does need to understand that sometimes the protocol for doing that refraction you’ve done for 15 years may be different in a study, and you do have to follow the protocol that they have set up to standardize that data that they’re getting among all the sites.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Shane, say you had someone, fellow optometrist, come to you, and say they wanted to get involved in research. What would be the practical steps you would give to them to help them break in?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I think I would really recommend, and I have recommended the route I took, start with a marketing study because that’s going to be a little less stressful. It’s still very important, but maybe not as financially invested in by the sponsor. Learn the vocabulary, throw yourself into that. Learn the steps, learn to follow the protocol. You’re right, even a refraction, as simple as that is, is different when you’re following a protocol and you have to make sure you do it right.
Do 2 or 3 of those. Get a team member that you know works, work through that process. Then start to put yourself out there to companies in products or a space, whether that be contact lenses, dry eye, that you’re very familiar. Express your interest and show that you have a CV that supports. You have some working knowledge. Then you got to ask for help.
I am more than happy to help anybody getting into research. I get lots of calls. I know Katherine is. It is a great network of people who want to see each other succeed. Don’t be afraid to ask for help because nobody knows except you what you’re needing. There’s no silly question. I mean, I remember the alphabet soup of when I started, and it was so overwhelming. All that, build yourself into it slowly, make sure you like it, and then take little steps at a time.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
That’s great. You have to actually find these research studies. Katherine, how would you go about finding maybe your first research study, and then after that, how do you find research studies?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
To follow up a little bit in terms of what Shane said, I think speaking with the companies, the employees there you know, expressing your interest, showing that you run a very well-run practice with your regular patients, that you have the capabilities to do that. It’s about developing those relationships because I think there are a lot of optometrists, ophthalmologists who are interested in doing research, but the companies don’t know who is going to follow through, who will recruit the right patients, who will collect the good quality data, who will follow the steps necessary so that they can really utilize the data and make good decisions moving forward.
I think for me, that was most important, along with speaking with other colleagues, like Shane mentioned, that I knew who was doing research, developing those relationships so they understood that you were committed to this, that you had an interest, you had the capability to do that. Then they can help introduce you to other individuals within the companies who do make those decisions. Understanding how the companies can be separated as well in terms of your sales rep will know nothing and not speak about the clinical studies. That’s a totally different division there as well. They may be able to help a connection be made with a different division, but within that company, there are so many different divisions, and they’re each working on their own priorities and their own goals. It’s finding the people who are really going to select the sites for that upcoming study or the important ones to learn from, build the relationships with, and show your ability to be able to successfully conduct the study.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
You bring up a great point indirectly there. When you are doing a study for a company, you have a very valued and trusted relationship. You and I are both doing studies for different companies, and you have to respect that confidence. You can’t talk about company “A” with company “B” whether you’re on an ad board or talking to a rep. The findings you’re getting should be a closed box at your site, and it’s the company’s ability then to share that if they choose to.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Yep, absolutely.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
That will get you kicked out of studies quickly.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely. Yes, it will. Yes. The confidentiality piece is so important. Even within companies as well. If that person is not on that specific study, even if I’ve worked with them in the past, you still don’t discuss that study with that individual.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Yeah, it’s super important.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Stay out of court. You’ve kind of already both mentioned some challenges, but Katherine, can you think of any other challenges that new researchers might face and maybe a way to get around them?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Shane had mentioned earlier in terms of how you allocate your schedule every day, and I think that can be a challenge for some doctors. How do I work that into my flow? I have a staff that has developed a great protocol for seeing our regular patients. That flow may now look very different with seeing some regular patients. Do you block off certain hours of the day? Do you only see study patients on this day? Do you just incorporate them every day where you can?
I think the optometrist first understanding what’s the commitment level required for the study. I think sometimes doctors do not understand the time it takes to really start from very beginning to initial paperwork to after data analysis, and you’re reviewing that final study report, the work that goes into conducting it. Educating themselves. Even speaking in depth with another optometrist who does it just to understand the steps required in general and the time commitment there is very difficult, but really prepping their staff of how it’s going to impact their everyday.
Another challenge in terms of identifying those right people within your practice, finding those people who are very detail oriented that will help support you, but then are also willing to do maybe their other role that they were initially hired to do. They’re just willing to take on an extra role to get this started within the practice, I think is something newer practices can find challenging when they’re getting into the field.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Shane, you’ve already mentioned that don’t do it just for the money. I totally agree with that. I did a master’s at Ohio State, and they told me I’d get $200 for doing it. I’m like, that’s crazy. Why would anyone care about $100?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Let me look at that ROI. Oh yeah, it’s horrible.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
We like torture.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
But are there any business or operational benefits to the practice?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Well, of course there are. I think however you evolve it, and like most of medicine and really most of eye care, you’re going to be able to personalize how you do it to yourself and what’s available. If you do it in an efficient way, whether that’s Katherine seeing the bulk of the patients herself, or whether that’s me working with a couple sub-Ls and a team, there’s the direct, there is financial benefit. It may not be proportionate to being in clinic, but there is financial benefit. It’s great adjunctive income. But then there’s also your patient care level goes up, which grows your practice. Your relationships grow your practice.
It’s a cumulative effort that gets you there, but you also have to be willing to invest in that. When I talk to young doctors wanting to open a practice, or doctors wanting to move into research, I always say you’re going to have a commitment to it. You got to have skin in the game. If you’re not willing to do that in a way that’s appropriate, it’s going to be a problem.
I recently just talked to a group, and they didn’t have any OCT imaging in their clinics because they didn’t want to make that investment. I’m like, “Well, what about the level of patient care?” It’s the same here. You need to invest the right equipment and space and technology. A 4-meter lane seems like a tremendous waste, but if you’re doing research, you have to have 4-meter lanes in certain studies. You’re going to dedicate that research space to it. The return on investment’s there, there’s just an upfront cost and a commitment.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
I do think there’s a true benefit to patients. It’s an opportunity to be in research for patients, and maybe they could get a treatment before everyone else that could change their life. I’m involved in gene therapy, and I’m seeing that every day.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Absolutely. That’s a great point too. It provides the patients with access to treatment they may not otherwise get.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
I mentioned earlier there was a personal driver for research for me. I think you know, Andrew. I lost my oldest daughter to leukemia. She was diagnosed at 12. We managed to keep her for 6 years. It’s when research really took off for me because she was primary refractive. She didn’t respond to traditional therapies. We went from her diagnosis saying 2 years down the road, you’re going to be great, to them giving her 6 months on the outside. That’s when I learned to read research studies.
I became very engaged in, “Where can we go? What’s the best treatment available? How do I look at those outcomes, and how do I make sure she’s not getting a therapy here that prevents her from being enrolled in this next study?” Using research, we got to have almost 6 wonderful years with her, and she had a pretty good quality of life there. Six months to 6 years. I saw how research directly impacts patients, and I became very familiar with looking at nuances. That really made me want to evolve that.
Then I think pediatric oncology, more than any other field I’ve seen, the researchers work together because they’re so vested in patient outcomes. That’s where our era evolves is wanting to start to see that collaboration happen in eye care. Research, whether at any level of healthcare, has a direct impact on our patients, either today or tomorrow. Or maybe a patient you never see, but somebody sees the protocol or the product that was developed. That’s what our focus has to be and our driver has to be in research.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Yeah, I think that’s super inspirational. We are about out of time. I do want to ask 1 last question of each of you. If you had one nugget of advice you wanted to give to our listeners to get into research, or something you want them to consider about research, what would it be? Katherine, do you want to start?
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Find what interests you and what your passion is, and that will drive you to really do better each day and do the best work that you can. There is probably some area of research that would really spark your interest, and you’d find passion with and we need more optometrists doing it. Encouraging you to find what you really love and what you can excel at.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
Awesome. How about you, Shane?
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Well, I think Katherine’s is spot on, that would probably be my first. The second is you are as good as the people you surround yourself with. Whether that be your staff or the companies you’re working with, or the studies you’re involved in, your quality and your reputation depend on those people.
Andrew Pucker, OD, PhD, FAAO:
For sure. It really is a people-oriented industry. It’s about your knowledge and skill and your willingness to work with others. I think that’s a great take-home point. With that, I’d like to thank our guests, Katherine and Shane for joining us on the podcast today. Thanks for being here. I’d also like to thank you for joining us today on Clinical Trials Spotlight. If you’ve enjoyed today’s episode, be sure to subscribe and share the podcast with colleagues and others passionate about advancing ophthalmology and optometry research and patient care. Thanks for listening and we’ll see you next time.
Katherine Bickle, OD, PhD:
Thank you.
Shane Kannarr, OD:
Thanks.
Related Content
