CompFox AI Summary
This case concerns the compensability of Voltaren gel prescribed for the applicant's bilateral hand, wrist, and trigger finger injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the original findings. The Board found that the critical issue was whether the generic equivalent of Voltaren gel was exempt from utilization review (UR), not solely the brand name's formulary status. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify the issues and for a new decision on the eligibility of the generic Voltaren gel.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
This case concerns the compensability of Voltaren gel prescribed for the applicant's bilateral hand, wrist, and trigger finger injuries. The Workers' Compensation Appeals Board granted reconsideration, rescinding the original findings. The Board found that the critical issue was whether the generic equivalent of Voltaren gel was exempt from utilization review (UR), not solely the brand name's formulary status. The matter was returned for further proceedings to clarify the issues and for a new decision on the eligibility of the generic Voltaren gel.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.