10.25b. Medical Reports, Testimony and Opinions.

• Court: Kansas

Kansas Workers Compensation Settlement Reporter 10.25b. Medical Reports, Testimony and Opinions SummariesChapter 1010.25b Medical Reports, Testimony and OpinionsSee Also, Sagastume v. Rainforest Cafe, Inc., , Docket No. 1,014,040 (March 2006) See Also,Kuester v. McDonald's, Docket No. 267,026. (May 2005) July 2002. (Order) In order for a physician's opinion on causation to be accurate and credible, the physician must be provided a complete and accurate history of claimant's injuries, health history and job duties. Gleeson v. BFI Wast Systems, Docket No. 262,232 (July 2002). April 2002. (Award) The ALJ's decision to adopt the claimant's expert's opinion over that of the treating physician's opinion was appropriate. Claimant's expert exhibited a better grasp of the AMA Guides rating requirements by including a rating for claimant's loss of range of motion. Oltmanns v. Dillon Companies, Inc., Docket No. 247,676. April 2000. (Award) For the purposes of admitting into evidence the IME report without the physician's deposition, the Board finds no distinction between an IME report ordered under K.S.A. 44-516 for a scheduled injury under K.S.A. 1997 Supp. 44-510d and one ordered under K.S.A. 1997 Supp. 44-510e. The respondent failed to make a timely objection to the ALJ's order for the IME and the admission of the IME's report. Additionally, at the time the ALJ ordered the IME there was no stipulation to a scheduled injury. Betty Lowe vs. The Jones Store Company, Docket No. 239,741. October 1999. (Award) Medical reports from neutral physician appointed by the ALJ are not subject to the provisions of K.S.A. 44-519 and may, therefore, be admitted in evidence without the deposition of the physician. Provided, however, K.A.R. 51-9-6 states that either party will be allowed, if they choose, to cross examine a neutral physician appointed by the ALJ. Van Gorden v. IBP, Inc., Docket Nos. 199,461 and 199,462. [Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded with directions by Court of Appeals opinion October 27, 2000, Docket Nos. 84,110 and 84,173.] September 1999. (Award) Issue: Whether the ALJ' appointed independent medical examiners' opinion is limited only to functional impairment, unless supported by the independent medical examiners's testimony? The Board held: In this case, before the independent medical examiner could determine functional impairment, the doctor had to make a determination of whether claimant had suffered a permanent back injury as a result of an altered gait caused by claimant's initial right leg injury. Accordingly, Appeals Board concluded, under these circumstances, in addition to the functional impairment rating, the independent medical examiner's opinion on whether claimant's low back was permanently injured as a result of the altered gait was also admissible without the supporting independent medical examiner's testimony White v. Payless Shoe Source, Docket No. 180,691. July 1999. (Award) Generally, there is no privilege to prevent a health care provider from testifying, except where the provider fails to provide the injured worker with a copy of the evaluation report after a proper request. Bauer v. Utility Contractors, Inc., Docket No. 222,833. March 1999. (Award) Only opinions, not all medical records, are covered by K.S.A. 44-519. Treatment records provided to physicians who testified to opinions formed in part upon their review of those records are admissible where parties stipulated to foundation subject only to limitations of K.S.A. 44-519. Staggs v. Hunter Care Centers, Inc, Docket No. 210,500. March 1999. (Award) Based on the restrictions determined by a physician who did not testify, the vocational rehabilitation expert testified about claimant's labor market loss. On appeal, claimant disputes the Asst. Director's finding as to the labor market loss as claimant asserts the Asst. Director erred when he considered the opinion of the rehabilitation expert because her...