Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Dental Regulation topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee backs bill to put dental‑hygienist nitrous/local‑anesthesia authority into statute
Summary
The EDNA committee heard testimony and recommended House Bill 144 ought to pass. The bill would reconcile Board of Dental Examiners rulemaking with state statute by adding training and permit requirements for dental hygienists who administer nitrous oxide and local anesthesia.
The House Executive Departments and Administration (EDNA) committee voted to recommend passage of House Bill 144, which would place into statute the training and permitting requirements the Board of Dental Examiners currently enforces by rule for dental hygienists who administer nitrous oxide and local anesthesia.
Representative Jackie Grotta, the bill’s prime sponsor, told the committee the Board discovered a mismatch between statute and rule: rules allow hygienists to administer nitrous oxide and local anesthesia with training and a permit, but the statute did not explicitly require the education or permit. The bill’s stated purpose is to align statute with existing Board rule so the Board can require training and an examination to obtain a permit.
At the hearing Laurie Rosado, a practicing dentist and counsel for governmental affairs for the New Hampshire Dental Society, told the panel that nitrous oxide is used widely in New Hampshire and that hygienists already practice within their scope; HB 144 would simply move the Board’s current rule requirements into statute. Other committee members asked whether there was evidence of unsafe practice; sponsors and witnesses said there was no known pattern of unsafe practice but that putting qualifications into statute improves clarity and patient protections.
After public testimony, Rep. Grotta moved the committee recommendation that HB 144 “ought to pass.” The motion was seconded and carried on a roll call with the committee recording a unanimous affirmative recommendation (12 yes, 0 no). The committee subsequently placed HB 144 on the consent calendar.
What happens next: HB 144 will be reported out of the EDNA committee with an “ought to pass” recommendation and placed on the consent list for the House. If the House adopts the committee report, the statutory changes will allow the Board of Dental Examiners to enforce the training and permit standards currently reflected in Board rules.
Speakers who provided sworn testimony or spoke on the record at the HB 144 hearing included Representative Jackie Grotta (prime sponsor); Laurie Rosado, practicing dentist and counsel for governmental affairs, New Hampshire Dental Society; and several committee members who questioned the bill and later voted on the motion. The Board of Dental Examiners requested the change, per sponsor testimony.
Details excerpted from the hearing record include the Board’s finding of a statutory/ rule discrepancy regarding administration of nitrous oxide and local anesthesia, testimony that the practice is already occurring under Board oversight, and the committee’s formal “ought to pass” vote. The bill as heard does not expand what hygienists may do beyond current rule; it places the Board’s training and permit expectations into statute to remove the mismatch.
