JILL M. KOHLER, Employee/Appellant,
v.
DOUGLAS CNTY. HOSP. and MN COUNTIES INTERGOVERNMENTAL TRUST, SELF-INSURED, Employer-Insurer/Respondents,
and
BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF MINN. AND BLUE PLUS, THE WINKLEY CO., TWIN CITIES SPINE CTR., and SANFORD HEALTH, Intervenors.
No. WC18-6239
Minnesota Workers Compensation
Workers’ Compensation Court of Appeals
August 20, 2019
MEDICAL
TREATMENT & EXPENSE – REASONABLE & NECESSARY.
Substantial evidence in the record supports the compensation
judge’s denial of payment for cervical fusion surgery
as that medical treatment was not reasonable, necessary, or
causally related to the work injury.
EVIDENCE
– EXPERT MEDICAL OPINION. The compensation judge did
not abuse her discretion in relying on portions of expert
medical opinion offered where the medical opinion had
adequate foundation and was consistent with the judge’s
factual findings regarding the employee’s condition.
PRACTICE
& PROCEDURE – MATTERS AT ISSUE. Opinion of the
independent medical examiner that the work injury was
temporary and resolved did not improperly expand issues where
the compensation judge limited her Findings and Order to the
reasonableness, necessity, and causal relationship between
the employee’s various work injuries and the surgery
performed, which were the issues raised.
Determined by: Deborah K. Sundquist, Judge, Patricia J.
Milun, Chief Judge, David A. Stofferahn, Judge.
Compensation Judge: Stacy P. Bouman
DeAnna
M. McCashin, McCashin Law Firm, Alexandria, Minnesota, for
the Appellant.
Timothy P. Jung and Katie H. Storms, Lind, Jensen, Sullivan
& Peterson, P.A. Minneapolis, Minnesota, for the
Respondent.
Affirmed.
OPINION
DEBORAH K. SUNDQUIST, Judge.
The
employee appeals the judge’s finding that a fusion and
decompression surgery of five levels of the cervical spine
was not reasonable, necessary, or causally related to the
employee’s work injuries. Substantial evidence supports
the judge’s finding and we affirm.
BACKGROUND
Jill
Kohler, the employee, worked as a registered nurse for
Douglas County Hospital, the employer. When hired in 1991,
she worked without restrictions in her job which required
lifting up to 100 pounds. Beginning in 2001, the employee
began treating with John Toft, D.C., for neck pain and
headaches, and continued to treat through March 1, 2007.
Between 2001 and 2007, Dr. Toft’s notes do not reflect
that her work activities were the reason for the neck pain or
chiropractic treatment.
On
March 2, 2007, the employee injured her neck and back while
moving a patient whose knees had buckled. The employee was
placed on restrictions for one month and returned to work
with no restrictions. She reached maximum medical improvement
(MMI) for that injury with no recommendation for further care
after May 31, 2007.
On
August 2, 2008, the employee suffered a neck strain while
assisting a patient out of bed. The patient became
belligerent and grabbed and pulled the employee’s
forearm causing the employee pain in the back of her neck and
right elbow. She treated with Dr. Toft for neck pain
radiating into her shoulders. Dr. Toft recommended that she
follow up with a medical provider. The employee saw Michael
Bristow, D.O., at the Alexandria Clinic who ordered an MRI
scan.
The MRI
of the cervical spine showed moderate to severe degenerative
changes, including uncinate process spurs, neural foraminal
narrowing, and impingement of the left C7 nerve. Dr. Bristow
referred the employee...
