Diagnosis Not Dispositive Whether Medical Treatment For PA Work Injury Covered
The Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act sets forth that medical treatment related to a work injury is to be paid for by the workers’ comp insurance carrier (provided the treatment is reasonable and necessary). If there is a dispute as to whether treatment is related to a work injury, a petition must be filed. If, on the other hand, the dispute is whether treatment is reasonable and necessary, then the Utilization Review process is to be used. Whether treatment is related to a work injury is not a factor in a Utilization Review. A recent decision from the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania dealt with this distinction.
In Haslam v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (London Grove Communication), the injured worker (“Claimant”), fell from a building. He suffered fractures to his right ankle, tibia, and fibula, a left calcaneus fracture, and injuries to his neck and low back. After some time, the indemnity aspect (wage loss part) of the work injury was settled by Compromise & Release Agreement. The settlement documents described the work injury as “R and L Foot Fracture.”
After the settlement, the workers’ compensation insurance company filed for Utilization Review against the treating doctor, seeking a ruling of whether ongoing medical treatments, including compound creams, were reasonable and necessary. The Utilization Review Determination found all treatment to be reasonable and necessary.