Skip directly to search Skip directly to A to Z list Skip directly to page options Skip directly to site content

Legal Status of EPT in Nevada

permissible 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)

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)

plus sign Regulations incorporate by reference: (1) APHA’s CCD Manual; (2) AAP’s "2009 Red Book; (3) 2006 CDC STD Treatment Guidelines.
Nev. Admin. Code § 441A.200

plus sign All health care providers must follow Chlamydia and gonorrhea treatment guidelines in the 2006 STD Treatment Guidelines,. Nev. Admin. Code §§ 441A.490, 441A.540.

V. Prescription requirements (Explanation)

minus symbol Requires patient name on label of prescription. Nev. Rev. Stat. § 639.2353(2)(d)

VI. Assessment of EPT’s legal status with brief comments (Explanation)

permissible EPT is permissible.

Administrative regulations mandate adherence to the CDC STD Treatment Guidelines, as revised, for the treatment of chlamydia and gonorrhea. These regulations and the lack of contrary statutory or regulatory provisions suggest EPT is permissible.

Status as of March 16, 2009


plus sign supports the use of EPT

minus symbol negatively affects the use of EPT

permissible EPT is permissible

potentially allowable EPT is potentially allowable

prohibited EPT is prohibited