The Department of Labor concluded that the employer is
responsible only for those medical treatments that are reasonable and causally
related to the injury. Perry v. State of Vermont, Op. No.
13-13WC (2013) (citing 21 V.S.A. §640(a); Baraw v. F.R. Lafayette, Inc., Op. No.
01-10WC (2010); MacAskill v. Kelley Servs.,
Op. No. 04-09WC (2009)). Utilizing the
commonly cited five factor test, the Department concluded that the claimant’s
treating doctor’s opinions as to causality and necessity were more credible
than the employer’s doctor’s opinions. Perry v. State of Vermont, Op. No. 13-13WC (2013) (citing Geiger v. Hawk Mountain Inn, Op.
No. 37-03 (2003)). Specifically, the
Department cited the fact that the claimant’s expert was a treating physician
and that relationship allowed him to: differentiate between the work-related
injury symptoms and the symptoms that resulted from personal medical issues; and
use trial and error to create a successful pharmacology regime evidence by
better pain control, fewer drugs and lower dosages. Perry
v. State of Vermont, Op. No. 13-13WC (2013). The Department further concluded that the
employer’s expert opinion was based on an assumption, rejected by the
Department, that the claimant’s personal medical diagnosis excluded all other
possible causes for the worker’s pain complaints. Such reliance rendered his opinion
unpersuasive. Perry v. State of Vermont, Op. No. 13-13WC (2013).
The Vermont Workers' Compensation Bulletin is a collection of materials and information related to workers' compensation in Vermont and the Vermont Department of Labor. Founded in 2013, it is edited, condensed, and digested by Erin J. Gilmore, Esq.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Employer Ordered to Pay for Medications
The worker suffered a low back injury at work. The parties subsequently agreed to a
settlement that allowed the claimant to continue to receive medically reasonable
and necessary treatment that was related to the work injury. The employer filed for discontinuance of
medications based on a records review that concluded the medications were not
necessary for treatment of a work-related injury but rather for other personal
medical conditions. The doctor also
questioned whether the use of some of the medications, which were being used in
“an off-label context,” was medically appropriate. Perry
v. State of Vermont, Op. No. 13-13WC (2013).