Oregon committee hears bill to require urgent care centers to post services, staff and avoid 'emergency' labeling

Senators on the Senate Committee on Health Care heard testimony in support of House Bill 4,107 A, a measure that would set baseline service standards and transparency requirements for clinics that call themselves "urgent care." Representative Nancy Nathanson, sponsor of the House version, told the committee that as primary and specialty care access has narrowed, many patients increasingly rely on urgent care for timely care and need clear information about what services a clinic provides.

Nathanson said the bill does three main things: it defines "urgent care," sets minimum service expectations (including basic lab work, radiography, tests for common respiratory diseases, splints, sutures and 12‑lead electrocardiograms in typical urgent care settings), and requires clinics using the term "urgent care" to publish information about their affiliations, on-site provider types and accepted payment methods both online and near public entrances. "The bottom line is simply if a clinic calls itself urgent care it should meet some minimal basic standards," Nathanson said.

Supporters told the committee they negotiated the language widely. "This bill sets reasonable baseline expectations for facilities that present themselves to the public as urgent care centers," said Isis Thornton Saunders of Valley Immediate Care, adding that the transparency requirements "support informed patient decision‑making and appropriate use of care settings." Dr. John Moorhead of the Oregon College of Emergency Physicians said patients seeking time‑sensitive care "need clarity on where to go" and that inconsistent naming and marketing by some clinics has led to delays and unnecessary transfers to hospital emergency departments.

Committee members pressed sponsors on potential unintended consequences. Senator Reynolds, who identified herself as a pediatrician and a founding member of a prior urgent care business model, asked whether high‑capability standalone facilities that use the word "emergency" could be affected. Sponsors and witnesses responded that a separate statute addresses standalone emergency departments and that HB 4,107 A is intended to clarify naming and representation specifically for urgent care centers, not to regulate hospitals or already‑defined emergency departments.

The bill includes a hardship exemption to cover temporary unavailability of particular services or staff (for example, when a technician is unexpectedly out sick) and requires that patients be notified at check‑in and offered a telemedicine alternative when a service is not available. Sponsors emphasized the measure does not create new state licensing categories but instead sets transparency and minimum service expectations that many high‑quality urgent care providers already meet.

The committee closed the public hearing on HB 4,107 A and scheduled a work session on the bill for Wednesday, February 25.