Ohio Med Spa Regulatory Changes 2026: What Changed

Every summer, Ohio med spa owners go looking for the same thing: a plain list of what the state changed this year and whether it applies to them. The honest answer for 2026 is unusually short, and that shortness is itself the useful finding. Ohio did not overhaul med spa regulation this year. It passed one targeted statute about hair-removal lasers, and it left every other pillar of the framework — injectable delegation, ablative laser limits, ownership, drug handling, esthetician scope — exactly where it stood at the end of 2025.

That gap between expectation and reality is where practices get hurt. A vendor tells an owner the state loosened supervision, the owner rebuilds a schedule around it, and the loosening turns out to apply only to hair removal, only after a specific date, and only to an operator who finished a specific course. The reverse happens too, with an owner complying with a requirement Ohio never enacted. Both errors show up in complaint files.

So this guide is organized around verdicts and dates. Each change is named with the instrument that made it and the day it takes effect, and each measure that is only proposed is labelled as proposed. Much of the article is then spent on rules that did not move in 2026 but are the ones Ohio regulators keep citing — because for most practices the 2026 risk is not the new statute at all. For the national picture, our roundup of state med spa regulatory changes for 2026 puts Ohio beside the other states that moved this year.

The Short Answer: What Actually Changed for Ohio Med Spas in 2026

Ohio med spas answer to boards with genuinely separate authority. The State Medical Board of Ohio governs the practice of medicine under Revised Code Chapter 4731 and the delegation rules deciding who may perform which procedure. The Ohio Board of Nursing governs nursing and advanced practice registered nurses under Chapter 4723. The Ohio State Cosmetology and Barber Board governs estheticians under Chapter 4713. The Ohio Board of Pharmacy licenses the facility itself as a terminal distributor of dangerous drugs. Authority at one body does not travel to the others, and in 2026 only one of them saw a change that matters to aesthetics.

The One Enacted Change: House Bill 377

House Bill 377 of the 136th General Assembly is the entire list. It amends Revised Code section 4731.33 and enacts a new section 4731.331. Its subject matter is the application of light-based medical devices for the purpose of hair removal, and nothing else. Governor DeWine signed it on May 27, 2026, and it takes effect on August 25, 2026 — four days after this article publishes, which means that for anyone reading this the week it goes up, the new rules are not yet the law.

What Did Not Change in 2026

The list of things that stayed put is longer and, for most practices, more consequential. Ohio did not change who may inject botulinum toxin or dermal filler. It did not change the general physician delegation rules in Administrative Code Chapter 4731-23 or the statutory delegation limits in Revised Code section 4731.053. It did not change the prohibition on delegating ablative laser procedures. It did not change the delegation framework for vascular and non-ablative dermatologic laser work. It did not expand esthetician scope. It did not create a med spa facility licence, and Ohio still has no statute that uses the phrase "medical spa" as a regulated category.

How to Read the Rest of This Guide

The sections below answer each question with a verdict first. Where Ohio's position is genuinely unsettled — and there is one such place, involving rules that have to catch up to the new statute — the guide says so rather than guessing. For the standing picture rather than the year's deltas, our Ohio med spa regulatory profile characterizes the state across six dimensions on one screen.

House Bill 377: Ohio's One Enacted Med Spa Change of 2026

HB 377 is a narrow bill that drew attention because it touches the highest-volume service on an aesthetic menu. Understanding it means separating three things that blur together: the legislative history, the code sections it moves, and the operational effect.

The Legislative Timeline, Date by Date

The bill was sponsored by Representative Kellie Deeter and moved without opposition: the Ohio House passed it 95 to 0 on November 12, 2025, the Ohio Senate passed it 31 to 0 on May 13, 2026, and the Governor signed it on May 27, 2026. Ohio acts generally take effect ninety days after filing, putting HB 377's effective date at August 25, 2026. One caveat worth naming rather than papering over: the Legislative Service Commission's codified version of section 4731.33 carries an August 26, 2026 version date, a day off the date in the practitioner alerts. The change lands in the last week of August 2026 either way, but if you are writing a policy that cites a date, verify it against the statute on the day.

What HB 377 Amends and What It Enacts

Two code moves matter. First, HB 377 amends Revised Code section 4731.33, the existing statute that authorizes a physician to delegate the application of a light-based medical device for hair removal and sets the conditions on that delegation. Second, it enacts a wholly new section, 4731.331, which extends delegation authority for hair removal beyond physicians to advanced practice registered nurses and physician assistants. The second move is the structurally novel one: before August 25, 2026, hair-removal delegation in Ohio ran through a physician.

Why a Hair-Removal Statute Matters to a Whole Med Spa

Owners sometimes dismiss HB 377 as a hair-removal footnote. That underrates it, because hair removal is frequently the volume service funding the rest of the menu, and the supervision cap the bill raises has until now been a hard ceiling on how many rooms one physician could cover. What HB 377 does not do is generalize. Every loosening in it is bounded by the phrase for the purpose of hair removal, and reading it more broadly is the error most likely to follow this bill into a complaint file.

What HB 377 Changes on August 25, 2026

Four operational changes take effect on August 25, 2026. Each is a genuine loosening of the prior standard, and each carries a condition that is easy to miss.

The Physician Evaluation Requirement Is Narrowed

Under the framework in force through August 24, 2026, the delegating physician has to personally evaluate the patient before the first application of the device and again after it. HB 377 eliminates that before-and-after evaluation requirement — except when the delegation runs to a laser hair removal professional, where it survives. That carve-out is the whole point of the provision, so read it carefully: the relief depends on who is holding the handpiece. Delegate hair removal to a nurse and the evaluation requirement is narrowed. Delegate the identical treatment to a laser hair removal professional and it is not.

The Simultaneous Supervision Cap Goes From Two to Five

The existing rule caps a supervising physician at two delegatees performing these procedures at the same time. HB 377 raises that ceiling to five for hair removal, effective August 25, 2026 — the change with the largest effect on staffing math, since two rooms and five rooms produce very different schedules. It is also the change most likely to be over-read: the higher cap attaches to hair removal under the amended statute, and is not a licence to put five people on five different light-based procedures behind one physician.

Off-Site Supervision of Nurses Becomes Possible — With a 40-Hour Course

This is the headline provision and the one with the sharpest condition attached. The delegating physician may provide off-site supervision of a nurse performing hair removal if that nurse has completed a 40-hour training and education course on light-based medical devices used for hair removal, and the course is approved by the physician. Two details deserve emphasis. The 40 hours is a floor, not a suggestion, and the physician's approval of the specific course is part of the requirement — which means the physician needs to have reviewed a curriculum and be able to say why it was adequate. And unlike the narrow off-site pathway that already existed in the rules for cosmetic therapists, the new nurse pathway is not limited to established patients.

The Adverse-Event Reporting Duty

Loosened supervision comes with a tightened reporting loop. Under the framework taking effect August 25, 2026, a delegate must immediately report to the supervising physician any clinically significant side effect following application of the device, and any failure of a treatment to progress as expected; the physician must then evaluate the patient as soon as practicable. If you use off-site supervision, build this duty into a written protocol before the first off-site day, not after the first burn. An Ohio complaint investigation will ask what the delegate reported, when, and what the physician did about it.

APRNs and Physician Assistants Under the New ORC 4731.331

The new section is short and its effect is easy to state: for hair removal only, and starting August 25, 2026, an advanced practice registered nurse or a physician assistant may themselves delegate the application of a light-based device, subject to the same requirements that apply to a delegating physician.

What an APRN May Do, and the Standard Care Arrangement Limit

From August 25, 2026, an APRN's delegation authority is conditional on the APRN's standard care arrangement not prohibiting it. That is the mechanism Ohio uses to keep the collaborating physician in the loop, and it puts a concrete task on every Ohio med spa employing an APRN: read the standard care arrangement. If the document is silent, silence is not authorization — the safe course is to amend it so the arrangement addresses light-based hair removal delegation explicitly, in writing, before anyone relies on the new authority.

What a Physician Assistant May Do, and the Supervision Agreement Limit

From August 25, 2026, a physician assistant's authority under section 4731.331 is conditional on an effective supervision agreement being in place with a physician. The same practical instruction follows: the supervision agreement is the controlling document, and a PA who wants to delegate hair removal needs that agreement to support it. In both cases the delegating APRN or PA steps into the delegating physician's shoes for the purposes of the statute, which means they inherit the training verification duty, the supervision obligations, and the adverse-event response duty described above.

What ORC 4731.331 Does Not Do

Section 4731.331 grants delegation authority for hair removal and nothing else. It does not make an APRN or a PA a general delegator of medical procedures in Ohio, does not touch injectables, and does not alter what an APRN or PA may personally perform. Those questions are unchanged in 2026, governed by Chapter 4723 for APRNs and Chapter 4730 for physician assistants. For how the medical oversight role is built in Ohio, our guide to Ohio med spa medical director requirements covers the structure the new authority sits inside.

Ohio's Cosmetic Therapist Licence and the Laser Hair Removal Professional

Ohio's cosmetic therapist credential is the most distinctive feature of the state's aesthetic framework and the one most often described incorrectly, including by vendors selling training into Ohio. The 2026 verdict is clean: nothing about it changed this year. What changed earlier, though, keeps getting reported as new.

Licensing Stopped on April 12, 2021

The State Medical Board of Ohio stopped issuing cosmetic therapist licences effective April 12, 2021. That is a closed door, not a moratorium, and it means there is no application pathway to become a newly licensed Ohio cosmetic therapist in 2026. Anyone who tells you otherwise is working from material more than five years out of date. What survives is the status of people who already held the licence, which the statute preserves by reference to a fixed date.

What a Laser Hair Removal Professional Actually Is

Ohio law replaced the licence with a defined category. A laser hair removal professional is an individual who either held a cosmetic therapist licence under Revised Code Chapter 4731 as of April 11, 2021, or has completed a cosmetic therapy course of instruction of at least 750 clock hours and received a passing score on the certified laser hair removal professional examination. That second route is the only path open to a new entrant, and it is a substantial one — 750 clock hours is far more than a weekend certificate, and the examination is a recognized national credential rather than a vendor-issued document.

Why the Distinction Matters on the Schedule

Because HB 377's evaluation relief specifically excludes delegation to a laser hair removal professional, the category now determines which set of rules applies to a given treatment. From August 25, 2026, an Ohio practice running both nurses and laser hair removal professionals on hair removal is running two compliance regimes side by side. Build one physician evaluation workflow and apply it to everyone and it is over-built for the nurses but correct for the professionals — the safe direction to err. Build it to the loosened standard and apply it to everyone and it is wrong for the professionals.

The Verdict on Cosmetic Therapists in 2026

No 2026 statute or adopted rule changed the definition of a laser hair removal professional, the 750-hour requirement, the examination requirement, or the April 11, 2021 grandfather date. HB 377 changed the rules around delegation to that person without changing who that person is. Treat any claim that Ohio reopened cosmetic therapist licensing in 2026 as false unless someone can produce the filing.

OAC 4731-18: The Light-Based Rules That Did Not Change

Administrative Code Chapter 4731-18 is where the operational detail of Ohio's light-based framework lives, and it is the chapter most owners actually need to read. It did not change in 2026, and the legal alerts on HB 377 make that point explicitly: the new law does not change the Board regulations governing the use of light-based medical devices for other purposes, including non-ablative procedures.

The Chapter's Current Version Dates From July 31, 2021

The rules in Chapter 4731-18 carry prior effective dates of June 30, 2000, May 31, 2002, and July 31, 2021. The July 2021 version is the operative one. If a policy binder in your practice cites a 2002-era version of these rules, it is two revisions behind, and the 2021 rewrite was substantive rather than cosmetic.

The Five-Year Review Date of July 31, 2026 — and the Honest Gap

Ohio runs a five-year review cycle on administrative rules, and Chapter 4731-18 carries a five-year review date of July 31, 2026. That date has now passed. As of this writing I could not confirm from the public filings whether the State Medical Board carried the chapter forward without change, amended it, or has amendments still pending before the Joint Committee on Agency Rule Review. There is also an obvious reason to expect movement: the rules will need conforming amendments to sit correctly alongside HB 377, since the rule text still carries the two-delegatee cap that the statute raises to five. That is a genuine open question in Ohio right now, and treating it as settled in either direction would be a guess. Check the Register of Ohio and the Board's rules page before you rely on the rule text as printed.

Ablative Procedures Still Cannot Be Delegated

The rule states plainly that a physician shall not delegate the application of light-based medical devices for ablative procedures. Nothing in 2026 touched that. Fully ablative resurfacing in an Ohio med spa is a physician procedure, and no supervision arrangement, training certificate, or delegation document changes it. This is the single most commonly violated line in the chapter, usually by practices that classify an aggressive fractional treatment as non-ablative because the marketing material said so.

Vascular and Non-Ablative Delegation Is Untouched

A physician may delegate the application of a vascular laser for non-ablative dermatologic procedures, and may delegate phototherapy and photodynamic therapy for dermatologic purposes, under the conditions the chapter sets. Those pathways are unchanged by HB 377 and continue to run under the older, stricter supervision arithmetic in the rule rather than the new hair-removal statute. A practice that assumes its vascular laser room inherits the five-delegatee cap or the off-site nurse pathway has made an unforced error.

The Training Floors Are Still Real Numbers

Chapter 4731-18 sets documented training minimums rather than leaving competency to judgment. For delegated non-ablative vascular work the rule contemplates eight hours of basic education on specified topics, observation of at least fifteen procedures for each specific type of procedure to be delegated, and performance of at least twenty procedures under the direct physical oversight of the physician for each specific type — with documentation of satisfactory completion maintained by the physician. The phrase "each specific type" is the trap: training on one device or one indication does not carry across to another. Our Ohio laser safety guide works through the operator eligibility question in full.

The FDA Clearance Condition

One condition inside the hair-removal framework is easy to skip and simple to audit: the device must have been specifically cleared or approved by the FDA for the removal of hair from the human body. Checking that takes no clinical opinion — only the 510(k) documentation in your device binder. Grey-market devices, and devices cleared for a different indication than the one on your menu, produce a clean documentary violation before anyone reaches the supervision questions.

Injectables in 2026: Did Anything Change About Botox and Filler in Ohio?

No. This is the question that brings most Ohio owners to a page like this one, and the 2026 answer is a flat negative. No statute enacted in 2026 and no adopted rule changed who may inject botulinum toxin or dermal filler in Ohio, changed the supervision standard for injectables, or changed the good-faith examination expectation.

The Framework That Still Controls

Injectable delegation in Ohio runs through Revised Code section 4731.053 and Administrative Code Chapter 4731-23, not the light-based chapter. Those rules hold that a physician shall not delegate the practice of medicine unless specifically authorized by statute or rule, and shall not delegate a task beyond an unlicensed person's competence. On drug administration the line is explicit: except for the narrow exceptions in section 4731.053, a physician shall not delegate to an unlicensed person the administration of anesthesia, controlled substances, or drugs administered intravenously. Where drug administration is delegated, the rule contemplates on-site supervision, with limited exceptions such as routine topical application.

What That Means for an Injector Roster

The practical consequence has not moved: injecting a prescription drug in Ohio is a medical act performed by a licensed clinician acting within scope and under a valid order, and the physician retains responsibility for the manner in which a delegated task is carried out. Medical assistants and unlicensed aesthetic staff do not become injectors because a physician signed a protocol. Our guide to who can inject Botox in Ohio works through each credential and where its authority ends.

The Good-Faith Examination Did Not Get Easier

One point deserves isolating because HB 377 creates a genuine risk of cross-contamination. The evaluation relief in HB 377 applies to light-based hair removal. It has no application to injectables. If your practice reads about Ohio narrowing a physician evaluation requirement and quietly relaxes the pre-treatment examination workflow on the injectable side, that is a self-inflicted violation built out of a correct fact applied to the wrong service line.

Estheticians and the Cosmetology Board: What 2026 Did and Did Not Do

Ohio estheticians are licensed by the State Cosmetology and Barber Board under Revised Code Chapter 4713, a completely separate statute from the medical practice act. An initial esthetician licence requires at least 600 hours of board-approved esthetics training. The 2026 verdict here is also negative: no 2026 change expanded what an Ohio esthetician may do inside a medical aesthetics practice.

The Device Line Is Where Scope Ends

Ohio cosmetology rules prohibit licensees from providing services using devices that produce or amplify electromagnetic radiation at wavelengths of 180 nanometers or greater — a threshold that captures essentially every aesthetic laser and IPL platform on the market. Combine that with the medical board's position that applying a light-based device to the body is the practice of medicine, and the result is a hard boundary that physician supervision does not move. Supervision expands nothing: a cosmetology licence and a medical delegation pathway come from different boards and authorize different acts.

Where the Confusion Usually Starts

Most of the Ohio-changed-esthetician-scope chatter traces back to two real but unrelated things. One is administrative housekeeping at the cosmetology board — fee schedules, school licensing, reciprocity, infection control — genuine activity with nothing to do with medical scope. The other is the cosmetic therapist history covered above, which people hear as an esthetics credential because both involve skin. Different boards, different statutes, different authority. Our Ohio esthetician skin scope guide draws the line service by service.

What an Esthetician Can Still Own

The lane is narrower than many owners want but not small: consultation and skin analysis, pre-treatment preparation, post-treatment care and product guidance, and the surface treatments squarely inside cosmetology scope. An esthetician who wants to operate a device in Ohio has to pursue the medical-side pathway, not add a supervising physician to an esthetics licence.

Proposed, Stalled, and Not Adopted: What Ohio Med Spas Should Not Act On

The counterpart to a short list of changes is a list of things that look like changes and are not. Each item below is labelled with its real status, because acting on a bill that never passed is as damaging as ignoring one that did.

Senate Bill 226 — Introduced, Never Advanced

Senate Bill 226 of the 136th General Assembly is the companion to HB 377: same subject, same two code sections, same hair-removal focus. It was introduced on July 1, 2025 and referred to the Senate Health Committee, and it did not advance — the House vehicle carried the policy instead. SB 226 is not law and never was. It matters here only because a practice searching Ohio bill numbers will find language identical to the enacted statute and reasonably wonder which controls. The answer is HB 377.

Conforming Rule Amendments to Chapter 4731-18 — Expected, Not Confirmed Adopted

As covered above, the rule text and the amended statute will not read consistently on August 25, 2026, most visibly on the supervision cap. Conforming amendments are the obvious fix and the chapter's five-year review window landed in the same period. But expected is not adopted. Until a filing appears with an effective date on it, the correct posture is that the statute controls where it conflicts with an older rule, and that a practice relying on the loosened provisions should document why it read the law the way it did.

Board of Nursing Rule Proposals — Proposed in January 2026

The Ohio Board of Nursing opened its five-year review of Administrative Code Chapter 4723-8, the advanced practice nurse certification and practice chapter, and issued a package of proposed Administrative Code changes in January 2026. The reported content is mostly minor or clerical, with the notable items sitting in continuing education rather than practice scope — a proposal to accept Category A credits from approved organizations not headquartered in Ohio, and a change to the renewal reporting period. None of it, as proposed, alters APRN scope for aesthetic procedures. Treat it as proposed until an adopted effective date appears.

How to Tell a Real Change From a Vendor Rumour

Three questions settle almost every claim. What is the instrument — a bill number, a rule number, or nothing? What is its status — signed, adopted, pending, or introduced and dead? And what is the effective date? A claim that survives all three with citations is worth acting on; one that cannot name a bill number is a sales pitch. The most expensive Ohio compliance mistakes are practices that restructured around a rule that did not exist.

Unchanged in 2026, but Actively Enforced

If your 2026 compliance review only looks at what changed, it will miss where Ohio regulators are actually spending their time. These are the standing obligations that generate the most enforcement, none of which moved this year.

The Terminal Distributor Licence and Drug Records

Ohio requires facilities that possess, store or administer dangerous drugs — which includes essentially every med spa carrying neurotoxin, filler, lidocaine or weight-loss medication — to hold a terminal distributor of dangerous drugs licence from the Ohio Board of Pharmacy. Records of dangerous drug administration must be maintained for at least three years from the date of last administration. This is boring, checkable, and the fastest way to fail an inspection. In recent years the overwhelming majority of Ohio pharmacy board summary suspensions of terminal distributor licences have involved med spas.

Compounded GLP-1 Products

Weight-loss medication remains the sharpest enforcement front in Ohio, and it is a federal-plus-state problem. After the FDA resolved the semaglutide and tirzepatide shortages in 2025, compounded copies lost the shortage-based justification that had supported the market, and the Ohio Board of Pharmacy has been active against both Ohio and non-resident pharmacies shipping compounded GLP-1 products into the state. Ohio med spas have been cited over handling of weight-loss medication. Nothing here moved in Ohio's favour in 2026, and a practice sourcing compounded GLP-1s should be able to document where the product came from and on what legal basis.

Ownership and the Corporate Practice Question

Ohio's ownership rules did not change in 2026. The structural question — who may own the entity that employs clinicians and bills for medical services — continues to be governed by Ohio's professional entity requirements rather than by any med spa statute, and it is a common failure point for practices built by non-clinician entrepreneurs. Our guide to who can own a med spa in Ohio walks through the structures that work and the ones that quietly do not.

Records, Consent, and the Complaint File

The last item is not a rule change but an observation about how Ohio matters get decided. Board complaints are resolved from documents: the delegation instrument, the training file, the evaluation note, the consent form, the incident report, the drug log. A practice that did everything right and recorded none of it is in a materially worse position than one with an ordinary record and a complete file. If you make one investment off the back of 2026, make it the paperwork that proves your delegation chain.

Your Ohio Action List for Late August 2026

The changes described here land on August 25, 2026, which makes the work unusually easy to sequence.

Before August 25

1. Keep operating under the current framework, including the before-and-after physician evaluation for hair removal and the two-delegatee simultaneous cap. The new provisions are not available early.
2. Identify every person on your hair-removal roster and classify them precisely: nurse, laser hair removal professional, physician assistant, APRN, or physician. The classification determines which rules apply after the switchover.
3. Pull the standard care arrangement for each APRN and the supervision agreement for each PA, and check whether either prohibits or is silent on delegating light-based hair removal.

On and After August 25

1. If you intend to use off-site nurse supervision, confirm the 40-hour course is complete and that your delegating physician has actually reviewed and approved the specific curriculum — in writing, with a date.
2. Keep the physician evaluation workflow in place for every treatment delegated to a laser hair removal professional. The relief does not reach that pathway.
3. Write the adverse-event reporting protocol before the first off-site shift: what counts as clinically significant, who is called, how fast, and how the physician's response is recorded.
4. Leave your vascular, non-ablative and ablative protocols alone. They run under Chapter 4731-18, not the amended statute.

Either Way, Document the Reading

Because the rule text and the statute will not line up perfectly for some period after August 25, 2026, write a short internal memo recording which authority you relied on for each decision and on what date you checked it. That memo costs an hour and is the difference between a defensible judgment call and an unexplained deviation. Pair it with a full pass through our Ohio med spa compliance checklist, and if you would rather adapt documents than draft them, our library of med spa SOP and protocol kits maps to each of these requirements. More Ohio-specific guides sit on the Ohio med spa compliance hub.

Summary

1. Ohio enacted exactly one med spa law in 2026: House Bill 377 of the 136th General Assembly, signed May 27, 2026, effective August 25, 2026.
2. Effective that date, HB 377 amends Revised Code section 4731.33 and enacts section 4731.331, reaching light-based devices used for hair removal only.
3. It narrows the before-and-after physician evaluation requirement, except where delegation runs to a laser hair removal professional.
4. It raises the simultaneous supervision cap from two delegatees to five for hair removal.
5. It permits off-site physician supervision of a nurse who has completed a 40-hour physician-approved course on light-based hair removal devices.
6. New section 4731.331 lets APRNs delegate hair removal where the standard care arrangement permits, and PAs delegate where an effective supervision agreement is in place.
7. Nothing in 2026 changed who may inject neurotoxins or dermal fillers, or the delegation rules in Chapter 4731-23 and section 4731.053.
8. Nothing in 2026 changed the ablative delegation prohibition or the vascular and non-ablative pathways in Administrative Code Chapter 4731-18.
9. Ohio stopped issuing cosmetic therapist licences on April 12, 2021; the surviving category is the laser hair removal professional, at 750 clock hours plus the certification examination.
10. Senate Bill 226 was introduced July 1, 2025 and never advanced out of the Senate Health Committee. It is not law.
11. Chapter 4731-18's five-year review date was July 31, 2026, and whether conforming amendments have been adopted was not confirmable as of this writing — check the filings before relying on the rule text.
12. The active enforcement fronts in Ohio remain terminal distributor licensing, drug records, and compounded weight-loss medication — none of which changed this year.

Disclaimer: This article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice. Ohio med spa regulation spans the State Medical Board, the Board of Nursing, the State Cosmetology and Barber Board and the Board of Pharmacy, and administrative rules can be amended after publication. Effective dates and rule text should be verified against the Ohio Revised Code, the Ohio Administrative Code and the Register of Ohio before you rely on them. Consult an Ohio healthcare attorney about your specific structure, staff and services.