Medical Practice Act Rule Changes Official

The sweeping re-write of the administrative rules for the Illinois Medical Practice Act by the Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (IDFPR) was formally adopted on December 13, 2024. This was the first major overhaul of the rules since 2005, and the comprehensive rule change document was over 100 pages long. The Illinois Chiropractic Society spent substantial time advocating for chiropractic physicians by carefully reviewing the rules and submitting public comments requesting substantive changes to proposed rules that appeared detrimental to our doctors or their patients.

The first notice of the rule proposal was filed by IDFPR in December of 2023. ICS submitted a comprehensive eight-page written response to the department shortly after, outlining our concerns with the proposal. IDFPR, in its official response to the comments, agreed with the ICS on several points and reversed course to delete or amend those provisions. A few ICS suggestions, however, were not accepted.

Advertisement

As the process works for rule changes, there  is a second notice period that includes a hearing by the legislative Joint Committee on Administrative Rules (JCAR). In October of 2024, ICS submitted its second set of written comments to both IDFPR and JCAR, highlighting proposed changes that were not addressed by the department in its first response. Overall, the IDFPR was pleased that the IDFPR accepted certain ICS recommendations, although the final couple of ICS requests were not included in the final adopted rules, as detailed below.

Notable Medical Practice Act Rule Amendments

• The IDFPR proposed to decrease the number of years, from 3 to 2, within which a licensee could reinstate an expired license without having to submit proof of professional competency. This would have required the licensee to pass additional testing and fulfill other conditions simply to reinstate a license within one non-renewed cycle.

The ICS objected, recommending that the cycle should remain three years to track with the renewal cycle. The IDFPR agreed, so in the adopted rule, it remains three years. Therefore, in most cases, licensees will be able to reinstate an expired license within three years upon proof of continuing education and payment of fees, and additional testing or education should not be routinely required.

• The IDFPR also proposed to decrease the number of years, from 3 to 2, for licensees seeking to restore a license after disciplinary status. A licensee who petitions to restore the license from discipline may do so by simply paying the fee and proving continuing medical education if the licensee has not been out of active practice for more than two years.

However, if the licensee has been out of practice for more than two years, he or she must prove professional competency – including passing NBCE Part IV. Previously, the rule had no Part IV requirement, instead requiring completion of a one-year program in an approved chiropractic college or the Special Purpose Examination for Chiropractic (SPEC).

 The ICS initially objected to this change, arguing that requiring Part IV may be unnecessarily onerous in disciplinary cases that did not involve patient care.

The IDFPR declined to change this provision, so the Part IV provision is now in the rule.  Therefore, licensees who have not practiced for more than two years due to a disciplinary order will now be required to pass NBCE Part IV to restore the license from discipline.

The IDFPR did not respond to the ICS’ request for clarification as to how this will apply to licensees who have already passed Part IV. Typically, NBCE does not offer Part IV to persons who have previously taken and passed it, so it is unclear whether a year of additional education will be the only avenue to restoring the license from discipline.

• The ICS was successful in 2011 in clarifying chiropractic scope in the Medical Practice Act to include advice regarding the use of non-prescription products. The IDFPR proposed to add a new rule provision stating that chiropractic physicians have authority to “administer” non-prescription or over-the-counter products. The Illinois State Medical Society filed comments objecting to chiropractic physician authority to “administer.” In response, the IDFPR has removed this new section entirely and will rely on the wording of the Medical Practice Act. The ICS believes the IDFPR interprets the Medical Practice Act to permit the administration of non-prescription products, as well as advice concerning their use.

• For physicians holding a license in more than just Illinois – The rule included a change to allow licensees to apply CME credit hours from another jurisdiction if the CME is “verified” by the other jurisdiction. The ICS requested clarification as to which licensees may use CME credit from other states. The IDFPR retained this provision, clarifying that it only applies to a doctor who holds a license from another state (in addition to Illinois).  Therefore, if the doctor’s other state of licensure accepts/approves the continuing education provided in the other state, Illinois will also accept those hours to count toward Illinois CME. That can be shown by providing the other state’s statute or rule listing the sponsoring entity as an approved provider, or an approval from the state board itself approving the out-of-state continuing education.