AB 1399: Veterinary medicine: veterinarian-client-patient relationship: telehealth.

Existing law, the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, establishes the Veterinary Medical Board within the Department of Consumer Affairs for the licensure and regulation of veterinarians and the practice of veterinary medicine. Existing law specifies that a violation of the act is a crime. The act prohibits any person from practicing veterinary medicine, as defined, without a license. The act authorizes the board to deny, revoke, or suspend a license or registration or assess a fine for, among other things, violation of a regulation adopted by the board and unprofessional conduct, as specified.

A regulation adopted by the board makes it unprofessional conduct to provide specified treatment of an animal without having first established a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, as specified. That regulation also prohibits a person from practicing veterinary medicine in this state outside the context of a veterinarian-client-patient relationship or as otherwise permitted by law.

This bill similarly would prohibit the practice of veterinary medicine outside the context of a veterinarian-client-patient relationship, as defined, except as specified.

Existing administrative law requires telemedicine to be conducted within an existing veterinarian-client-patient relationship, with the exception for advice given in an emergency, as specified, and defines telemedicine to mean the mode of delivering animal health care services via communication technologies to facilitate consultation, treatment, and care management of the patient.

This bill similarly would authorize a licensee to practice veterinary medicine via telehealth, as prescribed. The bill would require a veterinarian who practices veterinary medicine via telehealth, among other things, to employ sound professional judgment to determine whether using telehealth is an appropriate method for delivering medical advice or treatment to the animal patient and providing quality of care consistent with prevailing veterinary medical practice, be familiar with available medical resources, be able to provide the client with a list of nearby veterinarians who may be able to see the animal patient in person upon the request of the client, keep, maintain, and make an animal patient record summary available, provide the client with information about the veterinarian, and secure an alternative means of contacting the client if the electronic means is interrupted, as specified.

The bill would also define the term client for purposes of the act and make other conforming changes.

Existing law requires all veterinary premises to be registered with the board. Existing law defines premises for these purposes as inclusive of mobile units or vehicles, but exempts them from independent registration with the board if they are operated from a building or facility that is the licensee managers principal place of business, the building is registered with the board, and the registration identifies and declares the use of the mobile unit or vehicle. Existing law specifies that the registration of veterinary premises is nontransferable and requires that, in the event of change of an owner or operator of the premises, the premises registration holder notify the board within 30 days after the change.

This bill would exempt the location where a veterinarian practices telehealth from the requirement that it be registered if specified conditions are met, including, among other things, that the veterinarian does not perform any in-person examination or treatment of animal patients at that location.

Because the bill would impose new requirements and prohibitions under the Veterinary Medicine Practice Act, the violation of which is a crime, this bill would impose a state-mandated local program.

The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state. Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement.

This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason.