2025 Texas sessionsRegular and both called sessions have ended. This index covers House and Senate bills, not resolutions. Statuses come from official reports.

← Back to bills and search results

2025 · Regular session · Senate bill

SB922

SB922 says certain sensitive test results cannot be released to a patient or specified representative through a consented-to electronic portal or similar system before the third day after the results are finalized.

Read bill highlights ↓

Official caption: Relating to the disclosure of certain medical information by electronic means.

Signed by governorSource-checked explanation published

Official report lists Senate author(s): Hancock. This does not identify sponsors or amendment drafters.

Report an error ↗

Bill explanation published · Version and amendment review scope is stated below · Individual amendment records may not be separately annotated.

Bill highlights

Selected points from the published explanation. Follow each point to its source-linked context; conditions and limits may matter.

Read the full explanation ↓

What does it do?

SB922 says certain sensitive test results cannot be released to a patient or specified representative through a consented-to electronic portal or similar system before the third day after the results are finalized. Covered results are pathology or radiology reports reasonably likely to show malignancy, and test results that may reveal a genetic marker. It is not a delay for every medical record, and the trigger is finalization—not the day the test was performed. The statute says “third day,” not three business days or a fixed 72-hour clock. New section 159.0062(a)–(b).

“Electronic means” covers a secure network or website, including a patient portal or health app, accessible by electronic device and through which the patient or representative has consented to receive records. The specified representatives are a minor’s parent/legal guardian, an adjudicated incapacitated patient’s legal guardian, or an authorized appointed attorney ad litem—not simply any relative. Responsibility for implementing the delay falls on the person administering or controlling the patient’s electronic health record. The incorporated definition describes a standards-based record usable across two or more health care organizations. Definitions and responsibility; Referenced representatives, (a)(2)–(4); Electronic health record definition.

Importantly, the act expressly bars civil, criminal or administrative liability and professional discipline for failure to comply with this new section or its new cross-reference. It does not extend that protection to the existing 15-business-day records-response deadline. That deadline remains, with compliance also required with the new electronic-release restriction when applicable. The act does not require a clinician to call before release or prohibit an earlier conversation by phone or in person under this provision. Sections 1–2; Existing records-request framework.

Signed May 19, 2025, the law took effect September 1, 2025. The new sensitive-result section applies to disclosures on or after that date. The amended records-request provision applies to requests made on or after that date; earlier requests remain under prior law. History; Sections 3–5.

What changed along the way?

The operative provisions are unchanged across all five bill versions. The amendment index lists no floor amendments. The sensitive-result definition, third-day electronic delay, responsibility assignment, explicit liability shield and two transition rules were all present from introduction through the enrolled act.

For the full amendment record, open the official amendment index.

Official bill versions

Compare the published text versions in the official text index. A change is not attributed to a specific amendment here without a verified record.

Who could benefit—and who could bear the costs?

Patients may have to wait to see these results electronically. That interval could allow a clinician to explain a concerning finding first, but the act neither requires that conversation nor guarantees it will happen; it can also delay a patient’s own access. Record-system administrators have an implementation duty, while the express shield limits consequences for noncompliance with this particular rule. These provisions do not establish immunity from unrelated medical negligence or other legal duties. Release restriction and limited shield.

The March 16 introduced and April 28 engrossed fiscal notes anticipate no significant state fiscal impact, assume costs can be absorbed with existing resources, and anticipate no local fiscal impact. They do not quantify private portal changes, patient distress or clinical outcomes.

Official sources

Catalog report retrieved 2026-10-25. Check the official record for corrections or later changes.