Report Title:
Controlled Substances; Regulation of Prescriptive Authority
Description:
Requires the LRB to study and comment on the regulation of prescriptive authority on a case by case basis. (SD1)
|
THE SENATE |
S.B. NO. |
2089 |
|
TWENTY-FIRST LEGISLATURE, 2002 |
S.D. 1 |
|
|
STATE OF HAWAII |
||
|
|
A BILL FOR AN ACT
relating to regulation of prescriptive authority over controlled substances.
BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF HAWAII:
SECTION 1. Prescription drugs, including controlled substances, are intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease. Because the effects of prescribed controlled substances can be either positive or negative, the prescribing of such drugs must be tightly controlled.
The prescription, use, or application of prescription drugs, including controlled substances, can conflict with or react to not only other medications being used by an individual, but can react to the makeup of an individual’s chemistry causing reactions that can cause anything ranging from a mild rash to a life-threatening event.
Prescriptive authority over prescription drugs, especially controlled substances, has come into conflict, where health care professionals other than medical physicians are desirous of gaining access to the right to prescribe prescription drugs that are categorized as controlled substances. Health care practitioners, such as pharmacists, psychologists, optometrists, and nurses have requested prescriptive authority, or already have limited authority, to prescribe a variety of controlled substances.
Physicians licensed under chapters 453 and 460, Hawaii Revised Statutes, are authorized to prescribe any and all drugs legally allowed to be prescribed in Hawaii, and have the necessary training to address emergency situations that may arise from reactions, overdoses, or conflicts with body chemistry or other drugs patients may be taking. Physicians are closely monitored and must maintain records of all patients receiving prescriptions involving controlled substances and make such records available to the department of public safety’s narcotics enforcement staff.
The legislature finds that granting prescriptive authority over controlled substances to practitioner groups other than those who have been granted such prescriptive authority as of the effective date of this Act, is a complex issue that must be studied before the legislature can make an informed decision. Therefore, the purpose of this Act is to require that the legislative reference bureau conduct an assessment before the legislature can consider any measure granting prescriptive authority over controlled substances to a new practitioner group, and report to the legislature its findings and recommendations.
SECTION 2. Chapter 23G, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
"§23G- Proposed prescriptive authority over controlled substances; impact assessment report. Before any legislative measure that grants prescriptive authority over controlled substances to a practitioner group other than those so authorized as of the effective date of this Act can be considered, there shall be a concurrent resolution passed requesting the legislative reference bureau to prepare and submit to the legislature a report that assesses the issues surrounding the granting of prescriptive authority to such practitioners."
SECTION 3. Chapter 23G, Hawaii Revised Statutes, is amended by adding a new section to be appropriately designated and to read as follows:
"§23G- Assessment report; contents. The report required under section 23G- for assessing the impact of a proposed granting of prescriptive authority shall include at the minimum and to the extent that information is available, the following:
(1) Comments from the director of health;
(2) Comments from the school of medicine of the University of Hawaii;
(3) Comments from the administrator of the narcotics enforcement division of the department of public safety;
(4) Safety concerns of granting the prescriptive authority to the proposed practitioner group;
(5) Determination of the level of education and experience necessary for the practitioner group to responsibly exercise prescriptive authority;
(6) Recommendations as to the scope of authority the practitioner group should be given if prescriptive authority is granted;
(7) Recommendations as to required protocols for maintenance of prescriptive record keeping if prescriptive authority is granted;
(8) Comparative analyses based on other states that have granted prescriptive authority to that practitioner group; and
(9) Any other issues that might be useful to the legislature in making its determination."
SECTION 4. New statutory material is underscored. SECTION 5. This Act shall take effect upon its approval.