Committee advances SB 118 to align audiology law with federal regs; senators seek minor clarifications

Senate Bill 118, described by its supporters as a technical modernization of the state’s Audiology Practice Act, passed the Senate Public Health, Welfare and Labor Committee after testimony for and against the bill.

Hope Gillison, an audiologist with more than two decades of experience, testified that SB 118 “streamlines the referral process by eliminating unnecessary visits that result in long wait times for patients,” and said the bill would let audiologists order scans and blood work when seeking specialty care so that patients arrive at specialist appointments with critical diagnostic information already completed.

Amin Amlani, president of the Academy of Doctors of Audiology and a former program chair at the University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences (UAMS), urged enactment, saying the bill aligns state law with a 2022 U.S. Food and Drug Administration rule and the current educational and clinical training of audiology doctorate graduates. “SB 118 provides a technical update to align Arkansas' laws with The US Food And Drug Administration's 2022 final regulations for prescription hearing aids,” Amlani said.

Opposition testimony came from Lance Manning, an ear–nose–throat surgeon, who supported audiologists’ role on the care team but urged limits. Manning pointed to experiences in other states and recommended clarifying language to avoid allowing audiologists to make initial medical diagnoses for conditions that require physician-level assessment. He recommended limiting ordering authority and explicitly excluding interpretation or independent medical diagnosis of imaging and lab results by audiologists.

Student and local audiologists also testified in favor. Blair Casey, a second-year doctor of audiology student at UAMS, described the length and intensity of audiology doctoral training and urged lawmakers to let practitioners work to the top of their training. Dusty Richards, a practicing audiologist, noted the profession does not seek to interpret imaging or lab results, and said the bill’s language can be refined if needed.

Committee members asked detailed questions about procedures already performed in practice, including cerumen removal (earwax) and foreign-body extraction. Members sought to ensure the bill’s prohibition on “surgery using an instrument” would not inadvertently preclude routine earwax removal, which many audiologists already perform using curettes, forceps or suction. Senator Penzo and witnesses discussed that the statutory language should be read to allow non-surgical removal of cerumen and foreign bodies while explicitly barring surgical alteration of human tissue.

The committee approved SB 118 on a voice vote; senators noted concerns about wording but concluded the bill, as written, prohibits surgery and does not remove currently accepted audiology procedures. No recorded roll-call tally was given in the hearing record; the committee chair announced, “Ayes have it,” and the bill advanced.