California Assembly Bill AB1533

California 2021-2022 Regular Session

• Introduced: 2/19/21
• Refer: 3/11/21
• Report Pass: 4/19/21
• Refer: 4/20/21
• Report Pass: 4/28/21
• Refer: 4/28/21
• Refer: 5/12/21
• Report Pass: 5/20/21
• Engrossed: 6/1/21
• Refer: 6/2/21
• Refer: 6/16/21
• Report Pass: 6/21/21
• Refer: 6/21/21
• Report Pass: 7/12/21
• Refer: 7/13/21
• Refer: 7/14/21
• Refer: 8/16/21
• Report Pass: 8/26/21
• Enrolled: 9/10/21
• Chaptered: 10/7/21
• Passed: 10/7/21

Caption

Pharmacy.

Impact

The bill modifies several existing provisions of the Business and Professions Code, particularly around the operation and licensure of pharmacies. It extends the authority of the California State Board of Pharmacy to implement changes such as increasing telehealth capabilities and modifying compliance assessments. Additionally, it enables greater flexibility for pharmacies, allowing for remote meetings and inspections, thus aligning pharmacy operations with modern healthcare practices and the ongoing effects of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Summary

AB1533, known as the Pharmacy Law amendment, aims to modernize and refine the regulatory framework governing pharmacy practice in California. The bill mandates that pharmacists who prescribe Schedule II controlled substances complete specific education on addiction, underscoring the growing concern over substance abuse and its societal impacts. It expands the role of pharmacists by allowing them to initiate or adjust drug therapy under collaborative practice agreements, thereby enhancing their involvement in patient care management and outcomes. This move is designed to adapt pharmacy practice to a more integrated healthcare model that promotes efficiency and patient safety.

Sentiment

The sentiment around AB1533 is generally supportive among healthcare professionals and regulatory stakeholders who view the bill as a progressive step in enhancing patient care through pharmacist involvement. However, there are underlying concerns regarding the regulatory burden placed on pharmacies and the implications of increasing pharmacists' scope of practice. Other stakeholders worry that the efficacy and safety standards may be compromised without careful oversight.

Contention

Notable points of contention include the potential for conflict regarding increased responsibilities placed on pharmacists, particularly around the management of drug therapy decisions. Some opponents argue this could lead to inconsistencies in patient care or over-reliance on pharmacists to make complex therapeutic decisions traditionally reserved for doctors. Additionally, discussions regarding adequate training and the quality of addiction education required for pharmacists have surfaced as potential obstacles to the bill's implementation, raising questions about the adequacy of pre-existing training frameworks.