States fail to follow California's lead in certifying phlebotomists.

Author: Dennis J. Ernst
Date: July 2008
From: Medical Laboratory Observer(Vol. 40, Issue 7)
Publisher: Endeavor Business Media LLC
Document Type: Article
Length: 985 words
Article Preview :

The saying "as California goes, so goes the nation" may be true with many political and social issues, but not when it comes to certifying phlebotomists. It has been over 10 years since a Palo Alto, CA phlebotomist was caught rinsing and reusing needles patient after patient. The California legislature acted swiftly, mandating minimum training standards and certification for all phlebotomists. After such a catastrophe, one would think that every state would have enacted similar legislation. Unfortunately, not one has.

The California bill established three classifications of phlebotomists: Limited Phlebotomy Technicians can perform skin punctures; those with the Certified Phlebotomy Technician-I designation (CPT-I) can perform skin punctures and venipunctures; CPT-II phlebotomists can perform skin punctures, venipunctures, and arterial punctures. The most common classification, CPT-2, must undergo an 80-hour training program at a state-approved school, followed by 50 successful venipunctures, 25 successful skin punctures, and the passing of a certification exam issued by a state-approved certification agency. Although Nevada and Louisiana had legislation on the books before the California law was passed, no new regulations establishing minimum training standards for specimen-collection personnel have been enacted by any other state since.

Short history of legislation

Legislators in other states have introduced similar legislation, but none have successfully made it into law. In 1999, a bill was introduced into the West Virginia senate providing for a phlebotomy-certificate training program and requiring that blood collection be done only by a certified phlebotomist. According to the Senate Clerk's office, it died...

Source Citation
Ernst, Dennis J. "States fail to follow California's lead in certifying phlebotomists." Medical Laboratory Observer, vol. 40, no. 7, July 2008, pp. 40+. link.gale.com/apps/doc/A182040780/AONE?u=gale&sid=bookmark-AONE. Accessed 16 Mar. 2026.
  

Gale Document Number: GALE|A182040780