SB 246 would change Indiana law governing advanced practice registered nurses (APRNs) and physician collaborative practice agreements. It directs the Indiana Medical Licensing Board to accept and review complaints about a collaborating physician’s practice agreement with an APRN, and it adds new statutory limits on how APRNs may collaborate with physicians and other licensed practitioners. Under the bill, an APRN could only collaborate with a licensed practitioner who works in the same practice area, and the APRN would be limited to practicing within the scope of the APRN’s own specialty.
The bill also changes the rules for physician collaboration by allowing a physician to enter into agreements with more than four APRNs, while prohibiting the physician from collaborating with more than four APRNs at the same time. The effective date is July 1, 2025. The bill amends provisions in the Indiana Code concerning the Medical Licensing Board’s duties and APRN practice requirements, and it creates a new section specifically governing APRN collaboration standards.
Impact
The bill would amend IC 25-22.5-2-7 to require the Medical Licensing Board to receive and review complaints involving physician collaborative practice agreements with APRNs, expanding the board’s oversight role. It would also amend IC 25-23-1-19.4 and add IC 25-23-1-25.5 to impose new collaboration requirements on APRNs, including same-specialty collaboration, scope-of-specialty limits, and a cap on the number of APRNs a physician may collaborate with simultaneously. These changes would affect APRNs, collaborating physicians, hospitals, and the board’s complaint-handling and regulatory functions.
Sentiment
Based on the bill text and the absence of recorded committee discussion or votes in the provided materials, the bill appears to be framed as a regulatory and oversight measure rather than a broad policy expansion. The overall tone is neutral and administrative, focusing on clarifying collaboration standards and board enforcement. No formal support or opposition is documented in the provided context.
Contention
The main points of potential contention are the new restrictions on APRN collaboration and the physician collaboration cap. APRNs and their advocates may view the same-specialty requirement and scope limitation as narrowing practice flexibility, while physicians and regulators may see the complaint-review provision and collaboration limits as necessary oversight. The bill’s allowance for more than four collaborative agreements, but not more than four simultaneous collaborations, may also raise questions about how the limit would work in practice and whether it creates administrative burdens for providers and the board.