California 2017-2018 Regular Session

California Senate Bill SB1229

Introduced
2/15/18  
Introduced
2/15/18  
Refer
3/1/18  
Refer
3/1/18  
Refer
3/19/18  
Refer
3/19/18  
Refer
4/9/18  

Caption

Pharmacists: opioid medications: consultation.

Impact

The bill introduces significant changes to California's Pharmacy Law by strengthening the regulations surrounding the dispensing of opioid medications. It aims to promote safer practices and informed decision-making amongst patients, which could potentially decrease the instances of misuse and addiction to opioids. Additionally, the bill specifies that hospital pharmacies are exempt from this requirement when a patient is admitted, which may aim to streamline care for hospitalized patients needing immediate pain relief.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 1229, introduced by Senator Stone, mandates that pharmacists provide an oral consultation to patients or their agents when dispensing opioid medications for the first time. This requirement is aimed at enhancing patient understanding of the risks and proper usage of these medications. Under the new regulations, if a patient declines the consultation, the pharmacist is prohibited from dispensing the medication. This provision is intended to address the growing opioid crisis by ensuring that patients are informed about the potential dangers associated with opioid usage before they begin treatment.

Sentiment

The sentiment surrounding SB 1229 appears to be generally positive among advocates for public health and safety who see the potential for the bill to contribute to reducing opioid-related harm. Opponents of tighter regulations, however, may argue that this additional requirement could create barriers to access for patients who may need these medications urgently. The discussion around the bill reflects a broader societal concern over balancing accessibility and patient safety in the context of opioid prescriptions.

Contention

While the bill is praised for enhancing patient safety, there are concerns regarding its implications for pharmacists and patients alike. Critics argue that mandating consultations could slow down the dispensing process and potentially deter individuals from seeking needed care. Additionally, there may be unease about the enforcement of such provisions and the implications for pharmacists in case of non-compliance, given that violations would be classified as misdemeanors under the new regulations. The bill's provision that no reimbursement is required for mandated costs also raises questions regarding its financial impact on local agencies.

Companion Bills

No companion bills found.

Similar Bills

CA SB1379

Pharmacy: remote services.

CA AB1366

Reimbursement for pharmacist services.

CA SB655

Pharmacy.

CA SB339

HIV preexposure prophylaxis and postexposure prophylaxis.

CA AB1557

Pharmacy: electronic prescriptions.

CA SB1442

Community pharmacies: staffing.

CA AB1619

Pharmacists: drug disclosures: cannabis or cannabidiol interactions.

CA SB528

Pharmacy: automated drug delivery systems.