The committee met to take up new and pending business. This report focuses only on the bills listed below.

Pending Business
 
SB 1582 – Van Taylor, Relating to the designation of certain substances as hazardous controlled substances.

  • New committee substitute adopted; went from 8 criteria to three for DSHS mandatory consideration to determine substance prohibited; lines up with FDA requirement
  • Voted favorably
  • Sent to local calendar

 
SB 1583 – Van Taylor, Relating to classifying synthetic cannabinoid or cathinone as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Texas Controlled Substances Act.

  • Committee substitute adopted
  • Voted favorably
  • Sent to local calendar

 
SB 848 – Estes, Relating to the regulation of medical radiologic technology.

  • Committee substitute adopted
  • Voted favorably
  • Sent to local calendar

 
SB 542 – Kolkhorst, Relating to the prescription and pharmaceutical substitution of biological products.

  • HB 751 – Zerwas, laid out in lieu of SB 542
  • Very similar to senate bill
  • Replaced term practitioners with the singular; plural would have directed to any group rather than prescribing physician
  • Adjusted language to ensure only relevant information is transmitted
  • Ensures notification can be done through standard processes
  • Voted favorably
  • Sent to local calendar

 
New Business
 
SB 1813 – Kolkhorst, Relating to procedures for complaints filed with the Texas Medical Board against physicians.

  • Gives the physician a right to see the complaint filed against them
  • Would provide board to deliver copies of medical expert report along with name of each physician
  • Designed to provide a physician with the full knowledge of the measure and source of charges against them
  • TMA will probably not be for the bill
  • Campbell noted doctors need to know what is coming against them in order to be bale to defend themselves

 
Mary Robinson, Texas Medical Board

  • Schwertner asked what other licensed professionals are allowed complete disclosure of accounts filed against them
    • Confidential are nursing, pharmacy, dental and medicine; may not have confidentiality in veterinary board, funeral commission, podiatry
  • Kolkhorst asked if someone inside the Texas Medical Board can file a complaint against a doctor
    • Yes; in situations where a person gives testimony a physician would know who filed the complaint
  • Kolkhorst asked what is done about frivolous complaints
    • Have seen that before at TMB; when TMB becomes aware of that they send a letter noting that all additional complaints will be considered non-jurisdictional; physicians aren’t notified of future complaints
  • Kolkhorst noted that currently, the board notifies the physician that compliant has been filed and the nature of the complaint; this bill changes it so that the physician is provided a full copy of the complaint

 
Steve Hotze, Self

  • 4th attempt to eliminate any confidential complaints
  • Looking for a simple due process system

 
Dr. Andrew Schlaffley, Association for American Physicians & Surgeons

  • Support
  • Gives a doctor the piece of mind to know who filed a complaint against them
  • 6th Amendment allows a person to know who their accuser is
  • Dental board already does this
  • Court system recognizes the need for a level playing field

 
Lolly Lockhart, Texas Nurses for Patient Safety

  • Oppose
  • Nobody will be willing to file a complaint against a physician for fear of a subsequent lawsuit

 
Charles Bailey, Texas Hospital Association

  • Oppose
  • Nurses who submit complaints against a physician would be subject to harassment and prosecution
  • If the complaint is ultimately used as evidence against a physician it then becomes public information
  • Not limited due process currently

 
Dr. Arlo Weltge, Texas Medical Association

  • Oppose
  • Less credible claims are likely to be filed
  • Disclosing reviewers can be a problem because good physicians will not step forward

 
Bill left pending
 
SB 588 – Huffman, Relating to the dispensing of aesthetic pharmaceuticals by physicians and therapeutic optometrists.

  • Committee substitute laid out
  • Some pharmaceuticals are more safely and effectively dispensed when a physician can explain and show the patient how to apply them; such as topicals and ointments
  • Texas patients have more limited treatment options; generally Texas law prevents physician dispensing
  • There are a few exceptions such as for dangerous drugs in rural communities and for samples
  • The bill allows physicians to dispense aesthetic pharmaceuticals; requires a prescriptions; prescribed for the enhancement of an individual’s appearance
  • Committee substitute removes therapeutic optometrists so that only physicians are allowed to dispense
  • Taylor likes the legislation and would like to see more legislation in this area; improves quality of care
  • Campbell added her support; likes the substitute
  • Zaffirini asked about a similar Van de Putte bill in the past and asked why pharmacists were against it; Van de Putte was a pharmacist
    • Takes customers out of the pharmacy; probably a financial issue
  • Huffman noted the bill has been vetoed in the past

 
Dr. Renee Snyder, Self

  • Support
  • A physician needs to oversee the use of hydroquinone
  • Pharmacists do not study as much on topical medications as dermatologists do

 
Dr. James Allred, UT Dell Medical School

  • Support
  • These medications are extremely safe
  • Dermatologists study the use of creams and ointments all the time
  • Can help dermatologists practice cost conscious care by knowing what prices are

 
James Cullington, Self

  • Support
  • It is very instructive for physicians and dermatologists to be able to dispense these drugs directly to their patients

 
Mark Newberry, Alliance of Independent Pharmacists

  • Oppose
  • Allows dangerous drugs to escape the oversight of the pharmacy board
  • Could cause health risks because physicians may prescribe without knowing a patient’s drug list
  • Don’t want to increase the scope of practice under the guise of increased access

 
Audra Conway, Alliance of Independent Pharmacists

  • Oppose
  • Doctors are looking for new revenue streams
  • This creates a conflict of interest
  • This is a vendor drug bill; drugs have been marked up by 300% when sold directly to physicians
  • Not all of these drugs are as safe as they are being made out to be

 
Carol Hardin Oliver, Pharmacist

  • Oppose
  • Taking away Pharmacy Board oversight
  • Last year the agency denied proposals such as this
  • This process needs the second check of a second set of highly trained eyes

 
Brad Shields, Texas Federation of Drug Stores

  • Oppose
  • There is a reason Texas laws state that doctors should prescribe and pharmacists should dispense; it removes profit motive from the prescribing process
  • This is not about access
  • One of the supporters of this bill has a calculator to show physicians how much money they can make if this bill passes

 
Bill left pending