CompFox AI Summary
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both the applicant's and defendant's petitions for reconsideration. The Board upheld the trial judge's decision to deny massage therapy, finding it not medically necessary per ACOEM guidelines and not supported by the treating physician's reports. Conversely, the Board affirmed the need for a sleep study and orthopedic/psychiatric consults based on the primary treating physician's consistent recommendations, rejecting the defendant's challenges to the exclusion of PQME reports and admission of other evidence. Ultimately, the Board found substantial medical evidence supported the original award and denied both parties' requests for review.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board denied both the applicant's and defendant's petitions for reconsideration. The Board upheld the trial judge's decision to deny massage therapy, finding it not medically necessary per ACOEM guidelines and not supported by the treating physician's reports. Conversely, the Board affirmed the need for a sleep study and orthopedic/psychiatric consults based on the primary treating physician's consistent recommendations, rejecting the defendant's challenges to the exclusion of PQME reports and admission of other evidence. Ultimately, the Board found substantial medical evidence supported the original award and denied both parties' requests for review.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.