West Virginia House Bill HB2720

West Virginia 2023 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/17/23
• Refer: 1/17/23
• Refer: 1/27/23

Caption

Authorizing the Board of Osteopathic Medicine to promulgate a legislative rule relating to osteopathic physician assistants

Impact

The passage of HB 2720 would have a direct impact on the regulation of osteopathic physician assistants in West Virginia. By granting the Board of Osteopathic Medicine the authority to create specific legislative rules, the bill aims to enhance the scope and quality of care provided by these medical practitioners. This could potentially lead to improved healthcare outcomes, as more structured regulations may foster higher standards of practice within the osteopathic field. Moreover, it positions the Board to adapt to evolving medical practices and educational requirements which reflects national trends in healthcare.

Summary

House Bill 2720, introduced during the 2023 Regular Session of the West Virginia Legislature, aims to amend and reenact §64-9-1 of the Code of West Virginia to authorize the Board of Osteopathic Medicine to promulgate a legislative rule concerning osteopathic physician assistants. This legislative move is expected to formalize the practices and regulations surrounding the professional standards and operational guidelines for osteopathic physician assistants in the state, ensuring that the practice aligns with contemporary healthcare needs and standards.

Sentiment

General sentiment around HB 2720 appears to be favorable, particularly among healthcare advocates and professionals in the osteopathic field. The bill is seen as a positive step towards modernizing the regulation of osteopathic medical practices in West Virginia. The sentiment emphasizes the need for clear and applicable guidelines for physician assistants, which would be beneficial to both practitioners and patients by increasing the accountability and efficiency of care delivery.

Contention

While the bill has garnered support, there are underlying concerns regarding the extent of authority conferred to the Board of Osteopathic Medicine. Critics may argue the need for transparency and public input in the rule-making process to ensure that the interests of patients and the broader medical community are represented. Additionally, there might be discussions about the potential overregulation and whether it could limit innovative practices within the field if not carefully balanced.