Relating to the authority of an advanced practice registered nurse or physician assistant, or physician, regarding death certificates and certain do-not-resuscitate orders.
The implementation of SB1752 will likely have a profound impact on existing state laws regulating DNR orders and who can execute them. By granting APRNs and PAs the authority to handle DNR orders, the legislation promotes a more integrated health care model that allows qualified professionals to adhere to the expressed wishes of patients and their families without unnecessary delays. This bill is positioned to alleviate some of the burdens on physicians, allowing them to focus on more complex cases while ensuring that non-resuscitation directives are still prioritized.
SB1752 introduces significant amendments to the procedures and responsibilities concerning do-not-resuscitate (DNR) orders and the issuance of death certificates within the state of Texas. The bill broadens the authority of advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) and physician assistants (PAs) in making medical decisions related to DNR orders. It allows these practitioners to draft and issue DNR orders without necessitating a physician's direct involvement in every case. This change aims to enhance the efficiency of care delivery, particularly in urgent scenarios, ensuring that patient wishes regarding resuscitation are honored promptly and effectively.
For the bill to take effect, it requires compliance from healthcare facilities to accept DNR orders issued by APRNs and PAs, as well as the integration of these orders into patient medical records. The bill also outlines that healthcare professionals must validate DNR orders before acting on them, emphasizing the necessity for ongoing communication between providers, patients, and families regarding advanced directives. While the legislation aims to streamline processes within healthcare settings, the transition period may pose challenges as facilities implement these new regulations.
Despite its potential benefits, SB1752 has sparked discussions regarding the scope of practice for non-physician medical professionals. Critics raise concerns about the adequacy of training and the clinical judgment required to make such critical decisions as issuing DNR orders. Opponents argue that the amendments may undermine patient safety by expanding authority to practitioners who may not have the same level of experience as physicians. As a result, the bill faces scrutiny related to patient protection standards and the roles of different healthcare providers in end-of-life care.