Error processing SSI file
Legal Status of EPT in Texas
EPT is permissible.
I. Statutes/regs on health care providers’ authority to prescribe for STDs to a patient’s partner(s) w/out prior evaluation (Explanation) | “Establishing a practitioner-patient relationship is not required for: (i) a physician to prescribe medications for sexually transmitted diseases for partners of the physician’s established patient, if the physician determines that the patient may have been infected with a sexually transmitted disease…” 22 Tex. Admin. Code § 190.8(1)(L)(i) (effective 6/24/2009) “An APRN may order or prescribe medications for sexually transmitted diseases for partners of an established patient, if the APRN assesses the patient and determines that the patient may have been infected with a sexually transmitted disease. Nothing in this subsection shall be construed to require the APRN to issue prescriptions for partners of patients.” 22 Tex. Admin. Code § 222.4(e) |
---|---|
II. Specific judicial decisions concerning EPT (or like practices) (Explanation) | |
III. Specific administrative opinions by the Attorney General or medical or pharmacy boards concerning EPT (or like practices) (Explanation) | |
IV. Laws that incorporate via reference guidelines as acceptable practices (including EPT) (Explanation) | |
V. Prescription requirements (Explanation) | “A pharmacist may dispense a prescription when a physician has not established a professional relationship with a patient if the prescription is for medications for sexually transmitted diseases for partners of the physician’s established patient…” 22 Tex. Admin. Code § 291.29(b)(3). “The name of the patient’s partner… is not required to be on the label of a drug prescribed for a partner for a sexually transmitted disease…” 22 Tex. Admin. Code § 291.33(c)(7). |
VI. Assessment of EPT’s legal status with brief comments (Explanation) | EPT is permissible. Administrative regulations do not require a physician-patient relationship that would otherwise preclude EPT. Lack of contrary statutory or regulatory provisions suggests that EPT is permissible. |
* This legal authority predates the effective date of the state’s law that authorizes EPT. Status as of June 24, 2009 |
Legend
supports the use of EPT
negatively affects the use of EPT
EPT is permissible
EPT is potentially allowable
EPT is prohibited
EPT is permissible in 46 states: | EPT is potentially allowable in 4 states: | EPT is prohibited in 0 states: |
---|---|---|
Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming EPT is permissible in the District of Columbia. EPT is permissible in the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. |
Alabama Kansas Oklahoma South Dakota EPT is potentially allowable in Puerto Rico and Guam. |
Summary Totals
The information presented here is not legal advice, nor is it a comprehensive analysis of all the legal provisions that could implicate the legality of EPT in a given jurisdiction. The data and assessment are intended to be used as a tool to assist state and local health departments as they determine locally appropriate ways to control STDs.
For comments, feedback and updates, please contact CDC-INFO: https://www.cdc.gov/cdc-info/.
Error processing SSI file