Pennsylvania Workers' Compensation Lawyer Blog

May 5, 2014

Zohydro No More Dangerous Than Other Pain Relievers, Says FDA

A couple of months ago, we mentioned the FDA approval of a new pain medication, called Zohydro. The same properties which make Zohydro so exciting for the medical profession, and injured workers everywhere, caused great angst among government and addiction officials. Fast and effective relief of severe pain, unfortunately, also can lead to misuse and/or abuse of any substance. These concerns had officials lobbying the FDA to revoke its approval for this medication.

Recently, the FDA issued a Fact Sheet about Zohydro. After taking a close look at the benefits and risks of this medication, the FDA determined that its approval (for its intended usage) was correct. In fact, the FDA issued this release, in part, to correct some misconceptions about Zohydro.

Specifically, the FDA noted that Zohydro is available in varying strengths. Since it is designed to be a time-release medication, though Zohydro contains more hydrocodone than some other products, it is actually less potent than other opiate-based pain relievers currently on the market, as they are immediate-release products. Further, there is evidence that abuse-deterrent properties of some competing medications, such as Oxycontin, are not completely effective at preventing abuse or addiction. The FDA also recognized that, even if Oxycontin has some abuse-deterrent properties not found in Zohydro, Oxycontin “does not meet the medical needs of all people in severe pain.”

May 2, 2014

Using Nanotechnology in Anesthesia for Work Injuries?

by Glenn Neiman

Once limited to a role in science fiction books and movies, nanotechnology is getting ready to invade our lives in beneficial ways. Nanotechnology is the study of, or use of, extremely small things, often at the atomic level. How small? One nanometer is a billionth of a meter, or, in other words, there are 25,400,000 nanometers in an inch. Obviously, we cannot see these things with the naked eye (or even a basic microscope).

Scientists have discussed how nanotechnology could impact medicine for years. Or, at least, they have done so in theory. Nanobots could, in theory, perform surgical tasks in a human body; sort of a real version of the 1966 movie, Fantastic Voyage. Nanotechnology could also assist in prosthetics, medical tools and processes. The possibilities are truly endless.

But, some uses of nanotechnology have left the realm of “theory” and moved into that of “reality.” One recent example is an experiment conducted using an injection of magnetic nanoparticles in place of traditional anesthetic for an ankle block. The study was successful, demonstrating that this process does work (at least in rats). By identifying specific areas in which nanotechnology may benefit us, these researchers are helping other scientists refine realistic use of the nanotechnology.

April 24, 2014

New PA Workers’ Comp Judges Added, Others on the Move

by Glenn Neiman

Sometimes the Pennsylvania Bureau of Workers’ Compensation is hard to figure out. Typically, the hiring or transfer of Workers’ Compensation Judges (WCJs) is done behind the scenes with no formal notice or announcement. We usually discover the news through the grapevine. Indeed, yesterday, a member of the judiciary advised us of some impending transfers and new assignments. Yet, before we could even put pen to (virtual) paper for a blog entry, we were shocked and delighted by the receipt of an e-mail from the Bureau, announcing all of the new WCJ hirings and transfers.

There will be three new WCJs added to the judiciary, all in the Central District. In the Harrisburg Workers’ Compensation Hearing Office, Jeffrey Russell will be the New WCJ. Nathan Pogirski has been added to the bench in the Pottsville Workers’ Compensation Hearing Office, and Daniel Snyder will be taking the bench in the Wilkes-Barre Workers’ Compensation Hearing Office.

Additionally, several WCJs will be transferring to different hearing offices. Judge Kutz will remain in the Central District, moving from Pottsville to Harrisburg. Moving from the Central to the Eastern District, Judge Weyl goes from Harrisburg to Lancaster. Previously in Lancaster, Judge Hetrick will now be in Reading, both in the Eastern District. Also staying in the Eastern District will be Judge Puhala, who moves from Reading to Allentown. Judge Beach leaves the Eastern District’s Allentown office, going to the Philadelphia Workers’ Compensation Hearing Office, located in the Southeastern District. In the Western part of the State, Judge Jones moves from Washington to Pittsburgh, and Judge Santoro journeys across the State, leaving Philadelphia and heading for New Castle.

April 22, 2014

Payment of Wages After Injury Deemed Acceptance in PA Workers’ Comp; Reinstatement Proper Rather Than Claim

by Glenn Neiman

Often in a PA workers’ compensation case, the burden of proof is a critical issue. For example, the burden of proof faced by an injured worker in litigation of a Claim Petition is very different from that in a Reinstatement Petition. Unfortunately, however, there are times when an injured worker can win the battle (and have an appellate court agree an incorrect burden was placed) but lose the war (the appellate court then finding the injured worker still loses).

Such was the situation in Furnari v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Temple Inland). Here, the injured worker tore a tendon in his knee while doing his job, and required surgery on the knee. The workers’ compensation insurance carrier issued a medical-only Notice of Compensation Payable [NCP] (accepting the injury, but not disability), but the employer continued to pay the injured worker his regular salary (salary continuation). The injured worker then went back to a modified duty job for about five months before resigning.

Subsequently, the injured worker filed a Petition for Reinstatement, seeking ongoing workers’ compensation benefits. This was amended by the injured worker during the litigation to include a Claim Petition. The Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) found that the combination of the medical-only NCP and the payment of salary continuation acted as if there was a full NCP, so the proper burden of proof was only that of a Petition for Reinstatement. The injured worker need only show that his loss in earnings was related to his injury. Unfortunately for the injured worker, the WCJ ultimately concluded that the injured worker failed to show that his injury worsened or that he was not capable of the modified duty job that remained available to him. As such, the Reinstatement Petition was denied.

April 16, 2014

Workers’ Compensation Judge Carl Lorine Retires

by Glenn Neiman

It is with mixed emotion that we received word of the retirement of Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) Carl Lorine. Judge Lorine was a member of the judiciary in the Upper Darby Workers’ Compensation Hearing Office, which is located in the Southeastern District. Prior to becoming a WCJ, Judge Lorine served as Director of the Pennsylvania Bureau of Workers’ Compensation. We wish Judge Lorine great health and happiness in his retirement, but we will miss his presence on the bench in Delaware County.

April 14, 2014

“Rocket Docket” Hits Pennsylvania Workers’ Comp System

by Glenn Neiman

When an injured worker in Pennsylvania discovers that it may take a year or more to get a decision in his or her PA workers’ compensation case, the client is often, understandably, distraught. We often explain that our job is to maximize the chances that the case is litigated properly, but we are not able to make it go any faster. This, of course, does not help pay the client’s bills while the litigation continues.

So, we are certainly aware of the hardships that injured workers face while awaiting a decision in their cases. At the same time, we are also aware of what is required in the litigation of a case. In most cases, the injured worker will testify, there will be a deposition from at least one medical expert on each side, and, often, either testimony or a deposition from a fact witness, or a different kind of expert (such as vocational). Once we take all of that evidence, we write briefs (which are anything but “brief”) and then it goes to the Workers’ Compensation Judge (WCJ) to await a decision. Depending on the complexity of the case, this can take well over a year to have all of this completed.

We have been told recently by a few WCJs that the PA Bureau of Workers’ Compensation is now quietly insisting that cases be tried, and decided, within a year. They are labelling this new push as the “Rocket Docket.” While this can have some beneficial aspects, by having cases decided sooner, it also carries significant costs, such as the WCJs rushing cases, or by multiple attorneys having to handle a file due to frequent conflicts (less common with a smaller firm like ours, but still a risk).

April 7, 2014

UEGF Held to Same Rules as Other Parties in PA Workers’ Comp

by Glenn Neiman

We have previously discussed the Pennsylvania Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund (UEGF) and how that fund fills in when an employee is injured while working for an employer who failed to carry PA workers’ compensation insurance coverage. The UEGF is certainly an improvement over the way things used to be (when being injured working for an uninsured employer often resulted in no benefits at all), though there is a long way to go before the UEGF could be said to mirror the “remedial” nature of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act, which is designed to benefit the injured worker. A recent decision of the Commonweal Court of Pennsylvania does take a step in the right direction.

One of the problems with the UEGF, as it currently functions, is that it operates, in some ways, above the law. For example, a workers’ compensation insurance carrier in PA can be assessed penalties if it violates the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act; the UEGF is not subject to penalties for any reason. A regular insurance company can be assessed counsel fees if it presents an “unreasonable contest;” again, the UEGF is immune to this risk. We have wondered where the lines would be drawn to hold the UEGF to any responsibility.

In Pennsylvania Uninsured Employers Guaranty Fund v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal

March 13, 2014

Doctor Performing IRE in PA Workers’ Comp Must Have Clinical Practice

by Glenn Neiman

We have previously discussed the concept of an Impairment Rating Evaluation (IRE) in Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation. By now, our readers know that the IRE is a tool the workers’ comp insurance carrier can use to limit benefits in most cases to a maximum of around 11 and a half years. While the IRE is not designed to lead to a high burden for the insurance company, their success is not guaranteed.

Take, for example, the recent case of Verizon Pennsylvania Inc. v. Workers’ Compensation Appeal Board (Ketterer), decided by the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania. Here, the claimant hurt his neck and back in a work-related car accident, and began receiving workers’ compensation benefits.

After the injured worker received two years of total disability benefits, the comp insurance carrier obtained an IRE, which found that he had reached maximum medical improvement (MMI) and had a whole person impairment rating of 16%. Since this is lower than the ridiculously high standard of 50%, the insurance company filed a Petition to Modify benefits, changing the status from “total” to “partial,” and starting the clock on the entitlement to 500 weeks of partial disability benefits (the amount of the benefit does not change, just the duration). This IRE was performed by a physician approved by, and selected by, the PA Bureau of Workers’ Compensation (not the insurance carrier).

March 7, 2014

Powerful and Controversial New Pain Medication Available

by Glenn Neiman

A common theme we see with work injuries in Pennsylvania, whether with a complex regional pain syndrome, failed back surgery, brachial plexopathy, knee, hip or shoulder replacement, or other permanent conditions, is an injured worker dealing with chronic pain. As a result, we always keep an eye out for new methods of helping patients deal with the lingering agony that can accompany a serious work injury.

While many of these new methods, whether it be medication or other treatment option, arrive quietly, one new medication is coming with quite a fuss. Zohydro ER, manufactured by Zogenix, Inc., is a powerful new hydrocodone product. This medication was recently approved by the FDA, and, as stated in the press release issued by the FDA, “is the first FDA-approved single-entity (not combined with an analgesic such as acetaminophen) and extended-release hydrocodone product.”

Because Zohydro ER is so potent, there is great concern in the medical and news community that the product will cause addiction and health issues. According to ABC News, Zohydro ER can have up to ten times more narcotic than Vicodin. In fact, that same article stated that “the FDA’s own advisory committee voted against approval.”

March 6, 2014

Topics to Cover in Our Blog?

by Glenn Neiman

You may have noticed that we have not updated our blog as frequently in the past month or so as we had been. For better or worse, there have been no cases from the Commonwealth Court of Pennsylvania or the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania dealing with PA workers’ compensation issues. Also, we have not come across any recent medical developments, which would be of interest to injured workers in Pennsylvania. Even the normally volatile PA Bureau of Workers’ Compensation has been rather quiet of late.

While we will continue to keep our eye on the Courts, on developments in medicine and on happenings within the Bureau of Workers’ Compensation, we invite you to help us with this blog. Feel free to e-mail us at gneiman@bnlegal.com with any topics you think would be of interest to the readers of our blog. Perhaps there are questions that you have, or parts of the Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Act that could be explained better. Chances are, if there is something you are wondering, other injured workers may wonder as well.

Pennsylvania Workers’ Compensation Lawyer Blog