As an opinion and if given the option then optimization via material and the use of material ID’s as well as masking is a better way to go than trying to optimize at the geometry level as moving geometry around is a problem that has been solved a long time a go.
Dealing with problems like poke through in general as well as the level of flexibility as to the needs of the final result problem solving by materials seems to be the way of the future taking into consideration power apps like Zbrush which are more about making the much needed textures and materials that fixes things at a much higher level of flexibility than it is to bang around in the basement.
Masking is also a usable technique as to practical use over and above the ideals of what would be considered best practice that helps to create options of putting the detail into the areas that needs it and that does not add unnecessary detail in areas not required.
The face for example is a critical area that always needs a higher level of detail than say a big toe so even as a single unified mesh one can easily tessellate the face in LOD0, using material slots or ID’s, to a level that will support texture and material solutions (displacement and normal maps) and then the optimization done in the LOD stages.
So I would say your original post is at least a sound solution over and above trying for force a fix in the geometry which has all ways been a time consuming vampire versus painting in the solution using a displacement map that solves the annoying poke through problem.
In my opinion material usage solves problems where trying to move things around to fit you generally land up creating other problems or making things worst and wasting a lot of time and effort in the process.