The Academy expressed its opposition to Tennessee legislation (SB 665/ HB 920) that would add cerumen management to the scope of practice for hearing instrument specialists who have completed an International Hearing Society cerumen management course.
The Academy’s letter pointed out the critical differences between the education and training of an audiologist and a hearing instrument specialist and that cerumen management requires specialized training and experience that cannot be obtained through a short-term workshop as proposed by this legislation. For these reasons, the Academy’s letter advised that this scope of practice expansion for hearing instrument specialists would not be in the best interests of Tennessee consumers.
Recent Posts
Senate Passes Continuing Resolution: What It Means for Hearing Health
The Senate recently passed a continuing resolution (CR) to keep the federal government funded through December 11, 2026, giving Congress additional time to complete the…
General Audiology Board Certification (GABC): Historical, Current and Future Perspectives and Why It Matters
Like many other healthcare professionals, audiologists have the dubious distinction of the “alphabet signature” indicating our training and education, our expertise, and commitment to our…



