Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Scope Of Practice topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill to expand physical therapy scope draws sharp debate over dry needling and training standards
Summary
House Bill 30824 A, which would expand the statutory scope of physical therapy to include items such as dry needling and other authorities, produced split testimony on May 8 as PTs, acupuncturists and medical groups debated training, safety and consumer access.
House Bill 30824 A, which would modify the statutory scope of physical therapy practice in Oregon, drew a divided Senate Committee on Healthcare on May 8. The bill would update definitions of physical therapy, permit additional procedures in some circumstances and authorize the Board of Physical Therapy to set related rules.
Michelle Sigmund Gaines, executive director of the Oregon Board of Physical Therapy, told the committee the board is neutral and would use existing rulemaking authority to set education, training and certification standards if the Legislature expands scope. She said other jurisdictions have regulated procedures such as dry needling for decades and that board rules typically set minimum education and competency criteria.
Physical therapists and students urged modernizing Oregon’s practice act. Justin Dunaway, a physical therapist and professor, said most PT programs teach the underlying competencies and that evidence shows severe adverse events are rare; he said, “In the 46 states that allow PTs to use dry needling, there’s no demonstrable safety issues.” Several practicing PTs and patient advocates described clinical successes and easier access to care under broader scope.
Opponents focused on safety, training and device regulation. Jennifer Bridal, a licensed acupuncturist and vice president of the Oregon Association of Acupuncturists, asked the committee to remove language authorizing needle insertion by PTs, saying acupuncturists receive more than 1,600 hours of education and an independent national board exam. She argued PT certification courses (52 hours was cited in testimony) are not equivalent and asked for comparable training and safety standards.
The Oregon Medical Association urged guardrails on durable medical equipment prescribing, vaccine administration and financial conflict-of-interest rules; the OMA said physicians are bound by federal Stark/anti‑referral rules and that any expansion should include similar safeguards.
Several witnesses asked for inter‑professional negotiation. Chair Patterson encouraged PTs, acupuncturists and the medical association to meet and return with proposed language or amendments; the hearing closed with an invitation to submit written testimony and with the committee allowing 48 hours for online submissions from those who had signed up but could not testify during the allotted time.
No committee vote was taken during the hearing; staff said work‑session amendments could follow if stakeholders reach compromise language.
