I85PREP
⌘ K
NE Dental Hygiene Jurisprudence study materials
NE Dental Hygiene Jurisprudence study resources

NE Dental Hygiene Jurisprudence: Nebraska Statutes Governing Dentistry: Uniform Credentialing Act and §38-1130

NE Dental Hygiene Jurisprudence · Work through your exam, one topic at a time.

All guide sections

Nebraska Statutes Governing Dentistry: Uniform Credentialing Act and §38-1130

Domain 1 tests the statutory floor for Nebraska dental practice: the Uniform Credentialing Act (UCA) and Neb. Rev. Stat. §38-1130. Questions typically ask whether an act is within the practice of dentistry, who may perform it, what credential is required, and what conduct supports discipline. The statute sets outer limits; the regulations in Domain 2 supply procedures.

§38-1130: the definition that decides scope

  • The practice of dentistry includes diagnosis, treatment, correction, or prevention of conditions of the teeth, alveolar process, gums, jaws, and associated structures.
  • It also reaches extractions, surgical or operative procedures, prescribing or administering drugs, making impressions or appliances, taking dental radiographs, and giving anesthesia in connection with dental procedures.
  • If an act fits the definition, it is reserved to a licensed dentist unless a statute or regulation expressly authorizes a hygienist or assistant to perform it under required supervision.

Licensure and discipline

  • The UCA requires a credential before practice; unlicensed practice and aiding unlicensed practice are violations.
  • The Board of Dentistry advises the Department of Health and Human Services; discipline can follow fraud, incompetence, unprofessional conduct, or practice outside scope.
  • A dental hygiene license authorizes dental hygiene services, not independent diagnosis, prescribing, or surgery.

Worked example

A patient asks a hygienist to remove a mobile primary tooth because the dentist is at lunch. Extraction is expressly within the §38-1130 definition of dentistry. It is not a dental hygiene service, and “direct supervision” does not convert it into one. The hygienist must decline and have the dentist perform or authorize the appropriate dental procedure. Reasoning: classify the act under §38-1130 first; then ask whether a separate license or supervision rule permits delegation.

Traps

  • Treating “works in a dental office” as authority to perform any dental act.
  • Confusing supervision with delegation: the dentist’s presence does not expand the hygienist’s statutory scope.
  • Forgetting that the statute defines dentistry broadly, so novel procedures may still be dentistry.
  • Assuming a hygiene license permits diagnosis, prescribing, or anesthesia without additional rules.