ADA Renews Support for Nevada Rule Letting Assistants Scale, Hygienists Object

Edited by Dentaltown staff

The ADA has told the Nevada State Board of Dental Examiners it continues to support a proposed change to state regulations that would let trained dental assistants perform supragingival scaling, a proposal that has drawn extensive opposition from dental hygienists.

In a July letter, the association reiterated its support for changes to Nevada Administrative Code 631.220, building on comments it filed in April backing the Nevada Dental Association’s oral preventive assistant proposal. The ADA called the proposal thorough, well-researched, and responsive to the needs of patients and providers in Nevada, and said it is consistent with association policy dating to 1996.

The ADA pointed to activity in other states since April. It said the Missouri Dental Board voted in May to promulgate a rule creating a periodontal expanded-function dental assistant after reviewing that state’s oral preventive assistant pilot, that two Arizona schools plan to enroll students in oral preventive assistant training this fall, and that a Virginia law permitting trained assistants to perform supragingival scaling and coronal polishing took effect July 1. The association also restated its position that state dental boards are the sole licensing and regulating authorities for dentists and allied personnel.

Board President Ronald West said Nevada has roughly 0.8 dental hygienists for every general dentist and has seen about a 20% decline in licensed hygienists since 2020 while the number of dentists held steady. Nevada Dental Association President Aimee Abittan said the proposal creates an auxiliary role intended as a force multiplier for hygienists, modeled on programs in Arizona, Kansas, Missouri, and Illinois.

Hygienists have objected at length. Public comment the board compiled for its March 25 meeting runs more than 300 pages and is dominated by licensed hygienists opposing the scaling provision, listed as agenda item 6.a.v. Commenters wrote that the proposal would let assistants with less education than hygienists scale at the prophylaxis level under a temporary endorsement, and that expanding clinical duties without corresponding education risks compromising patient safety and undermines the standards that protect the public.

The American Dental Hygienists’ Association opposes the oral preventive assistant model in its published position statement, arguing the training is not comparable to the extensive didactic and clinical education required of hygienists.

The proposal remains before the board.

Sources:
ADA News, “ADA reaffirms support for Nevada proposal to expand dental assistant duties,” Aug. 4, 2026: adanews.ada.org/2026/august/nevada-proposal-dental-assistant-duties
Nevada State Board of Dental Examiners, additional public comment compiled for the March 25, 2026 board meeting: dental.nv.gov/…/3.25.2026_Additional_Public_Comment.pdf
American Dental Hygienists’ Association, position statement on the Dental Access Model Act, Dec. 20, 2024: adha.org/…/ADHA_PositionStatement_Dental_Access_Model_Act.pdf