Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Pharmacy Prescription Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears bill to allow 90‑day injectable testosterone supply after 12 months of monthly prescriptions
Summary
A bill to permit 90‑day supplies of injectable testosterone for patients who have had 12 months of monthly prescriptions drew questions from pharmacists about pharmacy workflow and recordkeeping; sponsors said the 12‑month requirement aims to reduce diversion and doctor‑shopping risks.
Get email alerts on the Pharmacy Prescription Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The House Committee on Health and Human Services and Elderly Affairs took testimony on House Bill 126, which would allow pharmacists to fill a 90‑day supply of certain injectable testosterone medications for patients who have completed 12 months of monthly prescriptions.
Representative Dan McGuire, appearing as a cosponsor for Representative Popovici Mueller, described the policy as a follow‑on to prior legislation that created a similar exception for testosterone gel formulations. He said injectable testosterone is used by a subset of patients who require a different delivery method and that the 12‑month requirement was intended to ensure continuity of prescriber oversight and to reduce the risk of diversion or doctor‑shopping.
A committee member with pharmacy experience asked how pharmacists would verify patients’ prior 12 months of prescriptions and whether that requirement would create burdens in retail pharmacy operations, particularly when patients use multiple pharmacies or cross state lines. McGuire said prescribers would be the primary source of continuity and that an amendment may be needed if the statutory language should place responsibility on prescribers rather than pharmacists.
Members asked whether monitoring for adverse effects or clinical follow‑up needed to be specified in statute; sponsors said routine clinical follow‑up was typical but that the bill’s core objective is supply and dispensing rules rather than clinical management.
No committee vote was taken on HB 126 during the hearing; the public hearing was closed and sponsors provided contact cards for follow‑up.

