By Logan Samuels
The Senate Finance Committee voted in favor of a bill requiring healthcare providers to notify patients of the possibility that their negative Lyme disease report could be false.
On March 17, a bill supported by Senator Ronald Young concerning laboratory tests for Lyme disease came to the floor of the Senate Finance Committee. In light of reports of various false negative Lyme disease test results in the past, this bill asked healthcare providers to notify all of their patients of the chance that their test results might not be accurate.
When a medical provider decides there is a need for Lyme disease testing, a patient undergoes an initial blood test. If the results of this test are positive, the patient undergoes a second blood test.
What this bill brings to focus is the fact that while many patients test negative for the first test, many of those negative results are false. Due to this common occurrence, many patients are already carrying or will develop Lyme disease and will not know because they had no prior need to take the second test.
Amanda Vaughn of Cecil County spoke on behalf of her teenage son, Brendan, who underwent testing for Lyme disease when he was 15. Although he complained of aches, lethargy, weakness and trouble breathing, his first round of blood tests yielded a negative result for Lyme disease.
Vaughn explained how her son went undiagnosed for two years and suffered from seizures, multiple ambulance trips, high blood pressure and was confined to a wheelchair. Brendan Vaughn could no longer play sports, make it through a day of school or follow his passion for service towards politics.
Vaughn was in tears as she recalled her son saying: “Am I going to die? Please don’t let me.”
Vaughn shared that eventually another parent suggested that Brendan could have Lyme disease and when they had him tested again, this was confirmed. Vaughn explained that although her son is mostly better now that he has been diagnosed, the late realization has led to various weak spells where Brendan still cannot perform up to his usual standards.
Both Vaughn and a representative from the House subcommittee said that symptoms for the disease vary greatly and that there are many false negatives and faulty tests. It was recommended that doctors and nurses warn their patients that while the test could be negative, the patient should ignore that result if they still recognize symptoms or are worried.
Alexander Connor, an Eagle Scout and avid hiker, said: “It’s important to check for tick bites every time you go into the woods because an unnoticed tick can quickly become a huge issue. Patients should keep in mind the potential for a false negative Lyme disease test…[and] should seek medical help if their symptoms worsen.”
Discussion on the floor led to the decision that specific changes were necessary to add to the bill during the subcommittee meeting on March 18. One of these changes suggested was physical paperwork that a doctor would need to give to their patient to sign that both protected the acting physician and explained that patients should be aware of their symptoms and if they worsen regardless of test results.
Finance Committee Member Katherine A. Klausmeier said that the first round of blood tests always has the most false negatives and that sometimes even the second round of testing has negative results. Klausmeier said that while the first round is for early detection, Lyme disease proliferates and can replicate every 10 days so the results can differ every few weeks.
Committee members agreed that healthcare providers needed to make their patients aware of the possibility of false test results and that this should be done through signed paperwork to protect both parties. The Senate Finance Committee took a vote on March 25 and unanimously moved to pass the bill as favorable with amendments.
Legislative Aide Tishan Weerasooriya said that Senator Ronald Young was excited to see the bill pass favorably in the senate. Weerasooriya said that the bill must now be read by various committees, and must crossover to the other chamber for a second and third read and ultimately pass in the House of Representatives in order to become law.
Weerasooriya also said that the fiscal impact would be minimal to implement the bill as it would only require printing costs for the signed doctor-patient agreements.