Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Overdose Response topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bill would add all FDA‑approved overdose reversal drugs to statewide standing order; supporters cite lives saved, health groups urge caution
Summary
A bill would expand Maryland’s standing order so all FDA‑approved opioid overdose reversal drugs are covered; sponsors and clinicians said the change would give responders more options against increasingly potent synthetic opioids.
A bill to require Maryland’s statewide standing order to include all FDA‑approved opioid overdose reversal agents drew a mix of endorsements from treatment and industry witnesses and questions from medical organizations during a House Health and Government Operations Committee hearing.
"House Bill 572 is a bill that would require the standing order in the state to include all overdose reversal drugs that are approved by the FDA," Delegate Kipke said, asking the committee for a favorable report.
Supporters including industry representatives and clinicians told the committee that other states already include all FDA‑approved agents in statewide standing orders and that the change would simply make those options available to first responders and community members. "There are 37 states that do standing orders. 20 of those states have already done this," Eric Alley, a company representative, said, urging the committee to follow the lead of other jurisdictions.
Clinical witnesses described situations where naloxone (naloxone hydrochloride) required multiple doses and newer, FDA‑approved agents could be more effective for potent synthetic opioids. "I'm asking us to believe in science and believe in our federal institutions like the FDA," Dr. Stephen Thomas testified, urging lawmakers to allow all FDA‑approved reversal agents to be included so clinicians and responders have options.
Committee members asked about safety, withdrawal severity, and emergency‑department impacts. Witnesses acknowledged possible stronger withdrawal effects with certain alternative agents and stressed the bill does not require stockpiling or mandate that any entity must carry every product. Advocates said the intent is to broaden the formulary so clinicians and first responders may choose the most appropriate, evidence‑based agent for specific circumstances.
Ending: The committee concluded the hearing without voting. Supporters urged a favorable report and asked the Department of Health and medical societies to work with sponsors on implementation details; opponents asked for clarifying language on training, stocking obligations and clinical guidance.
