AN ACT TO AMEND TITLE 16 OF THE DELAWARE CODE RELATING TO SURGICAL SMOKE.
Summary
HB173 amends Title 16 of the Delaware Code to create a new chapter on surgical smoke evacuation. The bill defines key terms such as “health care employer,” “smoke evacuation system,” and “surgical smoke,” and requires hospitals and freestanding surgical centers to adopt and implement policies mandating the use of smoke evacuation systems during surgical procedures likely to generate surgical smoke. The compliance deadline in the bill is April 1, 2026.
The measure is aimed at reducing exposure to surgical smoke, which the bill describes as a harmful by-product of energy-generating surgical devices that can affect the eyes and respiratory tract of people in the operating room. It also assigns enforcement to the Division of Health Care Quality under its existing authority, and the substitute bill clarifies that this division is the responsible enforcement agency.
Impact
The bill adds a new Chapter 93B to Title 16, creating a statewide requirement for certain health care facilities to use smoke evacuation systems in applicable surgical procedures. It directly affects hospitals and freestanding surgical centers by requiring policy adoption and operational changes, and it gives the Division of Health Care Quality enforcement authority without creating a new regulatory body. In practical terms, the bill may require facilities to purchase equipment, update procedures, and train staff to comply by the 2026 deadline.
Sentiment
The bill appears to have broad bipartisan support and little visible opposition. It passed the House 40-0 and the Senate 20-0, indicating unanimous support in both chambers. The substitute version also suggests the sponsors sought to clarify implementation details rather than alter the bill’s core policy direction.
Contention
There is little evidence of substantive contention in the available record. The only notable issue reflected in the substitute bill is clarification of enforcement responsibility, assigning oversight to the Division of Health Care Quality. That suggests any discussion likely centered on implementation and regulatory clarity rather than disagreement over whether surgical smoke should be addressed.