Nevada committee hears bill to streamline dental-hygienist reciprocity and expand assistants’ scope for routine scaling

CARSON CITY — The Assembly Committee on Commerce and Labor on March 21 heard Assembly Bill 334, sponsored by Assemblymember Heidi Kasama, a measure that would streamline licensure for dental hygienists licensed in other states and add coronal scaling with an ultrasonic unit to the duties allowed for expanded‑function dental assistants (EFTAs) with a special endorsement.

Kasama, the bill sponsor, told the committee AB 334 "revises provisions relating to oral health" and framed the measure as a response to what proponents called a critical shortage of dental hygienists in Nevada and nationwide. Paul Klein of TriStrategies summarized the bill's two core requests: "1, to allow the immediate licensure of dental hygienists who are eligible to practice. And 2, adding coronal scaling to the expanded function dental assistant role." Dr. Whitney Bryant, who described herself as a community health dentist working in rural areas, added: "Oral health is health," and said allowing trained assistants to do supragingival cleaning would let dentists and hygienists focus on more complex care.

The bill's backers, including the Nevada Dental Association, the Vegas Chamber and multiple practicing dentists and dental assistants, argued the change would increase capacity for routine preventive cleanings and reduce wait times that have left some patients unable to access timely care. Several presenters said Nevada has roughly 1,500 licensed hygienists — about 45 hygienists per 100,000 residents — versus a national average the presenters cited as about 64 per 100,000. Supporters told the committee the state’s two hygiene programs graduate only a few dozen clinicians annually, and that EFTAs trained under an established curriculum could serve as a "force multiplier" in offices with dentist supervision.

Opponents, led by representatives of the Nevada Dental Hygienists Association and the American Dental Hygienists Association (ADHA), strongly supported sections of AB 334 that ease out‑of‑state licensure but opposed the expansion of EFTA scope to include coronal scaling. Leah Cartwright, testifying for the Nevada Dental Hygienists Association, said section 3 "seems premature" because, she said, the expanded‑function dental assistant category created in 2023 has not yet produced any licensed EFTAs in Nevada. Hygienists and hygiene educators told the committee EFTA training programs are not yet running in Nevada, and that scaling — particularly with an ultrasonic device — requires substantial hands‑on education. Several hygienists said coronal scaling alone does not substitute for comprehensive supra‑ and subgingival care and raised concerns about the bill's current language and oversight provisions.

Assembly members asked about how other states regulate similar roles. Proponents pointed to long‑standing programs in Kansas and to variants in Illinois and Missouri. The bill's presenters proposed that EFTAs with a special endorsement would be required to pass national examinations and would work under direct dentist supervision, and that those safeguards plus regulation by the Board of Dental Examiners of Nevada would protect patients.

The committee did not take a final vote on AB 334 during the hearing. Committee members heard roughly thirty minutes each of pro, con and neutral testimony in a hybrid format (Carson City, Las Vegas, and by phone). Several rural communities were cited as having the greatest access problems, and proponents urged the committee to approve the bill to expand the pool of providers available for routine preventive care.

The bill record shows a mix of medical‑practice and education issues that regulators and the board would need to address if the Legislature advances AB 334.

For now the hearing is informational; no final action on the bill was recorded at this session.