An Act amending the act of October 24, 2018 (P.L.719, No.112), known as the Patient Test Result Information Act, further providing for definitions, for test results and for duties of Department of Hea . . .lth.
HB409 amends Pennsylvania’s Patient Test Result Information Act to change how certain diagnostic test results are disclosed to patients and how the Department of Health oversees compliance. The bill adds definitions for chronic condition, diagnostic imaging service, diagnostic radiograph, and health care practitioner, and removes the prior “significant abnormality” framework that triggered direct patient notice for imaging results. Instead, it requires health care facilities and clinical laboratories to give patients written notice at the time of service explaining that results will be available once finalized, that they can be accessed through an electronic health record patient portal, and that mailed copies may be requested for a reasonable administrative fee.
The bill also creates a one-business-day delay before certain sensitive results may be disclosed in an electronic health record, unless the ordering practitioner authorizes earlier release. This delayed-release rule applies to pathology reports, radiology reports, and clinical laboratory tests with a reasonable likelihood of showing malignancy, as well as tests that could reveal genetic markers. The bill preserves exceptions where results are given directly to the patient at the time of the test and clarifies that it does not override any existing face-to-face counseling or disclosure requirements under other laws.
HB409 narrows several existing notice requirements by exempting routine obstetrical ultrasounds, inpatient and emergency department imaging, diagnostic radiographs, imaging for previously disclosed chronic conditions, and results already provided at the time of testing. It also revises the Department of Health’s role so that compliance reviews are limited to checking whether covered facilities and laboratories have developed and implemented the required policies and procedures, rather than maintaining a broader complaint-based enforcement structure.
The bill appears to have broad support in the House, passing committee and final passage overwhelmingly, with only one no vote on the House floor. The available record shows no committee transcript debate, so the public sentiment reflected in the votes is generally favorable and noncontroversial. The main policy tension appears to be between improving patient access to results through portals and mail notices, while also protecting patients from immediate release of potentially alarming cancer-related or genetic information before a clinician can discuss it.
Notable points of contention are likely to involve the one-business-day delay for certain results, the shift away from immediate direct notice for imaging abnormalities, and the administrative burden on facilities and laboratories to update policies and procedures. Another possible issue is the allowance for mailed results to carry a reasonable fee, which may raise access concerns for some patients. Overall, the bill is a patient-notification and electronic health record disclosure measure aimed at balancing transparency, timing, and clinical context.
HB409 would amend the Patient Test Result Information Act by replacing the prior direct-notification framework for diagnostic imaging abnormalities with a broader patient-notice system tied to electronic health record access and mailed delivery options. It would also impose a one-business-day hold on certain pathology, radiology, and clinical laboratory results related to malignancy or genetic markers, unless released earlier by the ordering practitioner or already provided directly to the patient. The Department of Health’s oversight authority would be narrowed to compliance reviews of licensed facilities and laboratories focused on whether required policies and procedures are in place and implemented.
The bill’s recorded action suggests strong bipartisan or at least broad House support, with unanimous committee votes on amendment and reporting and a 202-1 final passage vote. No committee transcript is available, so there is no documented floor or committee debate to indicate organized opposition. The overall sentiment appears favorable, with lawmakers likely viewing the measure as a patient-information update that improves access while preserving clinical discretion for sensitive results.
The main areas of potential contention are the delayed release of malignancy-related and genetic test results, the removal of the prior “significant abnormality” direct-notice requirement for imaging, and the extent to which patients should receive results immediately through electronic records versus through a clinician-mediated process. Health care facilities and laboratories may also object to the operational requirements for new policies and procedures, while patient advocates may focus on whether the one-business-day delay and mailing fee could slow access or create barriers. The bill’s supporters appear to favor balancing timely access with the need for counseling and reduced patient anxiety.