The Arkansas State Board of Dental Examiners (ASBDE) met on June 4 in regular session. Here is the Rules & Regulations Committee report as provided by Dr. Allen Williams:
The rules and regulations committee met on Wednesday, June 4, 2025, at 6 PM via zoom. Those in attendance were Corneshia Harrison, Meredith Rogers, Board Attorney Jessica Kloss, Dr. Keith Jones, and Dr. Allen Williams.
The committee had 4 items on the agenda for discussion.
ITEM 1: OLD BUSINESS: REVIEW PROPOSED RULES ON TELEDENTISTRY
This is a proposed amendment to Dental Practice Act Article XXI
The Teledentistry amendment draft was originally constructed by previous board attorney Sara Farris in response to a change in state laws. The Telemedicine Act passed in 2017 (178401 of the Arkansas Code), and this amendment was created to update our rules to fall into compliance with that law. Board attorney Jessica Kloss wants to ensure no new or more recent telemedicine acts have been passed that would affect the language in this proposal. She also wants to review the proposal more closely to make sure that there aren’t any differences between this and the statue itself. It was tabled for further review and research and will be readdressed at subsequent meetings to ensure that the dental practice act follows state law.
ITEM 2: NEW BUSINESS: ADDITION OF RULES PERTAINING TO THE INJECTION OF BOTOX AND DERMAL FILLERS BY HYGIENISTS (POSSIBLE AMENDING ARTICLE XI)
Regarding Item 2, the rules and regulation committee unanimously agreed with the previous position of the members of this board, in that the board has no position other than those clearly written within the rules of the dental practice act, and no additional changes should be made at this time regarding this issue.
ITEM 3: ADDITION OF RULES REQUIRING CONTINUING EDUCATION PERTAINING TO HPV-RELATED OROPHARYNGEAL CANCER PREVENTION (POSSIBLY AMENDING ARTICLE XIV)
Regarding Item 3, the rules and regulations committee opted to consult with the Department of Health to investigate the alignment of this particular CE topic requirement of HPV education against neighboring states as well as the feasibility of passage before proceeding further.
ITEM 4: CLARIFICATION ON ARTICLE XVII CONCERNING ON-THE-JOB TRAINING FOR DENTAL ASSISTANTS
DUE TO THE RECENT RELEVANCE AND PAST RECURRENCY OF THIS ISSUE TO THIS BOARD, WE FELT THE ONUS TO PRESENT THE CURRENT STANDING AND INTENTION OF THE RULES AND REGULATIONS COMMITTEE IN SEEKING A TIMELY RESOLUTION
Regarding Item 4, Article XVII, section E of the dental practice act states: upon receipt of one or more of the 4 expanded function permits available within Arkansas, a dental assistant can then be considered a registered dental assistant with the board. The path of completion is clearly defined regarding expanded function permits pertaining to administration of nitrous oxide and sedation monitoring with state recognized courses or exams. However, for the expanded duties of radiography and coronal polishing, an “on the job training” route presents, widely known and recognized by the Arkansas State Board of Dental Examiners, as option B on the application for registration as a dental assistant in the state. This “on the job training” refers to an education course as approved by the board and proof of competency from an Arkansas licensed dentist (alluded to, but not directly written in Article XVII, Section E, subsection 2,3). By request to the board office, a longstanding “RDA packet” can be obtained and used as an approved curriculum to help dentists develop dental assistants for their own offices, reflective of the initial spirit of this additional legal pathway to registered dental assistant. However, some dentists and some “dental assistant schools” commercialized this opportunity to mass produce dental assistants, often at a significant tuition cost to these students without providing the appropriate training and skill development necessary of the position. This abuse has created chronic complaints to the board, in the past and present alike. Upon recommendation from the board attorney, additional research will be completed to determine the best course of action to enforce a board-approved course without completing rule changes and tampering with existing policies, with the hope of better oversight and application of the current language. This topic will be re-addressed in subsequent rules and regulations committee meetings before final presentation before the board for approval.
