Pennsylvania House Bill HB2364

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 4/8/26
• Refer: 4/8/26

Caption

Further providing for definitions, for training and license required and exceptions and for physical therapist assistant, education and examination, scope of duties and certification.

Summary

HB2364 would amend Pennsylvania’s Physical Therapy Practice Act to expressly define “dry needling” and incorporate it into the statutory definition of physical therapy. The bill describes dry needling as a physical intervention using a filiform needle to stimulate trigger points and diagnose and treat neuromuscular pain and functional movement deficits, while making clear that it is not acupuncture or any practice based on oriental medicine. It also broadens the definition of physical therapy to include a range of evaluation, treatment, prevention, wellness, consultation, education, and research activities. The bill would require a licensed physical therapist to complete a board-approved dry needling certification program before performing dry needling. It also amends the scope of duties for physical therapist assistants to state explicitly that they may not perform evaluation, testing, dry needling, interpretation, planning, or modification of patient programs. The act would take effect 60 days after enactment.

Impact

HB2364 would change state law by updating the Physical Therapy Practice Act to authorize and regulate dry needling within the physical therapy scope of practice, subject to certification requirements set by the licensing board. It would also clarify the boundary between physical therapy and acupuncture, and it would further restrict physical therapist assistants from performing dry needling or other core clinical functions reserved to licensed physical therapists. The bill would affect physical therapists, physical therapist assistants, the State Board of Physical Therapy, and patients receiving musculoskeletal or pain-related care.

Sentiment

No committee transcript or vote history is provided, so there is no recorded debate or roll-call sentiment to assess. Based on the bill text alone, the measure appears to be a professional scope-of-practice and licensure clarification rather than a controversial policy overhaul. Its framing suggests support for allowing trained physical therapists to use dry needling while maintaining regulatory safeguards.

Contention

The main likely point of contention is scope of practice: whether dry needling should be treated as part of physical therapy and under what training standards it should be allowed. Supporters would likely emphasize access to treatment, pain management, and professional clarity, while opponents may raise concerns about patient safety, overlap with acupuncture, and whether the board-approved certification requirement is sufficient. A secondary issue is the explicit exclusion of physical therapist assistants from dry needling and other evaluative or planning functions, which reinforces a strict supervisory model.