California Medical Board Cracking Down on Med Spas
Posted By American Med Spa Association, Wednesday, March 26, 2014
The American Med Spa Association Offers
Insights into Expanded California Medical Board Enforcement Focus on
Med Spas and Recent Unannounced Audits of California Med Spas
By Harry Nelson,Founding & Managing Partner, Nelson Hardiman, LLP
In response to persistent concerns over medical spas operating
outside the bounds of California law, the Medical Board of California,
in coordination with the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology of
California, has expanded the enforcement focus on med spas, with a task
force expanding unannounced audits. The Medical Board is focusing on
organizational structure, governance, and scope of practice concerns,
with particular attention to the unlicensed practice of medicine, as
well as inappropriately autonomous allied health professionals exceeding
their scope of practice.
These audits highlight the need for physician control, appropriate
business ownership and supervision structures, limitations on the role
of unlicensed persons, and attention in ensuring clearer separation
between the performance of non-medical esthetician services and medical
procedures by appropriate licensed personnel under physician supervision
to ensure the health and safety of patients.
California based members of the American Med Spa Association (AmSpa)
have requested guidance about a new wave of unannounced audits of
medical spas led by the Medical Board of California, in many cases
coordinated with the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. Medical spas
across Southern California have received unannounced visits from Medical
Board investigators, demanding to see corporate records. In many cases,
investigators from the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology have followed
soon after, seeking operational records and demanding greater
separation of medical and aesthetic personnel and operations.
Although medical spa compliance with laws and regulations has been a
longstanding subject of concern in California, the unannounced audits
reflect a renewed and expanded focus. In July 2012, Governor Jerry Brown
signed into law Assembly Bill (AB) 1548, which increased penalties for
illegally owning and operating medical spas. According to Harry Nelson
of Nelson Hardiman, LLP, who advised AmSpa on the law’s enactment,
AB1548 was a response to concerns that preexisting penalties were
insufficient to dissuade illegal operations and repeat offenders. Under
the preexisting law, a person found guilty of operating an illegal
business faced a maximum penalty of $1,200 and six months incarceration.
AB 1548 increased the potential penalties to up to$500,000 and five
years incarceration for cases exceeding $950 in patient charges.
Despite this increase in penalties in 2012, reports of problems with
medical spas have continued to surface. In August 2013, an Encino
cosmetic surgeon was charged with involuntary manslaughter after a
patient died during liposuction. . The Medical Board is currently
investigating several pending cases involving patient injuries following
medical spa procedures. In its 2012-2013 Annual Report, the Medical
Board noted as a major enforcement accomplishment that it referred 122
cases for criminal prosecution, an increase of nearly 40% over the
referrals in the previous year. Medical spa prosecutions investigated by
Operation Safe Medicine, the Board’s unlicensed practice unit,
constituted a significant component of this increase.
As a result of these reports, in recent months, the Medical Board has
renewed its focus on medical spas in numerous respects. The Board’s
Committee on Physician Supervisory Responsibility has been focused on
ways to tighten regulation of medical spas. One example of the
Committee’s work was Title 16, California Code of Regulations (CCR),
Section 1364.50, which established requirements, effective July 1, 2013
for physician availability during the performance of elective cosmetic
procedures involving the use of a laser or intense pulse light device.
Another example is the proposed amendment of Title 16 CCR Section
1399.541 to increase physician supervision requirements to "immediate
availability”. This and other contemplated regulations will tighten the
oversight of medical spa operations.
The launch of unannounced audits focuses on identifying California
medical spas that are merely "renting” physicians as medical directors,
when the businesses are in fact owned and controlled by either
unlicensed persons or allied health professionals, such as physician
assistants or nurses. By demanding to review corporate records, Medical
Board investigators hope to identify medical spas that are not
structured as professional medical corporations, which are the only
artificial entities that are permitted to hire physicians and perform
medical procedures. In addition to looking for organizational defects,
the Medical Board is also demanding copies of delegation of services
(for physician assistants) and standardized procedures (for registered
nurses), as well as attempting to identify any procedures being
performed by unlicensed medical assistants, in violation of their
limited scope of practice to perform "technical support services”.
The unannounced audits also appear to focus on addressing practices
that create confusion as to who is responsible for different aspects of
the services rendered in medical spas. The concern seems to extend
beyond the issue of whether physician functions are being delegated only
to appropriately supervised, allied health professionals (e.g.
registered nurses or physician assistants) to a broader concern with
differentiating and identifying cosmetologists and estheticians from
physician-supervised personnel. Reports from medical spas that have
received unannounced visits describe demands that esthetician
certifications from the Board of Barbering and Cosmetology be posted in a
different office from medical personnel licenses, and that different
rooms be designated for aesthetic and medical procedures. According to
Harry Nelson of Nelson Hardiman, "the guidance from investigators
regarding the need for formal separation of medical and aesthetic
practitioners and procedures exceed any regulation promulgated by either
the Medical Board or Board of Barbering and Cosmetology. The Boards are
free to suggest their preferences, but these should not be mistaken as
descriptions of legal requirements.”
In light of these latest enforcement efforts, medical spas in
California should prepare by reviewing their business structure,
documentation, and all aspects of their business operations. "It is much
simpler to address compliance issues proactively before the government
shows up,” observed Nelson, "than to do so in the aftermath of an
investigation identifying deficiencies.”
Harry Nelson is a partner at Nelson Hardiman, LLP, in Los
Angeles, California, where he counsels health care companies on business
and regulatory issues, including licensing, operations, and
reimbursement. Nelson Hardiman represents healthcare providers and other
businesses in litigation, transactions, and regulatory compliance
matters related to federal and state healthcare laws and regulations. It
is the only boutique firm in California to receive a Top Tier ranking
from U.S. News/Best Lawyers in the areas of healthcare law and
administrative law in every year of the U.S. News/Best Lawyers survey.
For additional information, Harry can be reached at (310) 469-7160 or go
to: www.nelsonhardiman.com