ADJ16830722 — California WCAB decision

What the panel ordered

Petition for reconsideration granted; WCJ's Findings rescinded; matter remanded for further proceedings and new decision.

Applicant sought reconsideration of the WCJ's August 23, 2023 Findings of Fact denying surgery; WCAB granted reconsideration, rescinded the Findings, and remanded for further proceedings.

Read the official decision →

What was disputed, and how it came out

Each issue the panel decided, with the reasoning it gave. An outcome is what this panel did on this record — not a rule, and not a prediction.

Medical treatment / UR / IMRRemandedright carpal tunnel · right elbow ulnar nerve

The medical reports from Dr. Taher and Dr. Sollaccio did not constitute substantial evidence as to whether the requested surgery was reasonable and necessary, but referenced diagnostics indicated possible need. The record was insufficiently developed, so remand for further development was required.

From the decision · page 4Having reviewed the trial record, we agree with the WCJ that the treatment notes/reports

The facts that decided it

What the panel treated as outcome-determinative, and which side it favoured.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The role the physician served, and the weight the opinion carried. Physicians are named here as the decision names them; we do not score them.

PTPNot substantial evidence

Requested right carpal tunnel release and right elbow ulnar nerve decompression surgery, but did not provide analysis or explanation for the recommendation; report not substantial evidence.

Tribunal found Dr. Taher's report lacked reasoning and explanation for surgery recommendation.

From the decision · page 4Dr. Taher did not provide an analysis as to why he was recommending the surgery for the applicant. The analysis should have included a summary of treatment rendered to the applicant for said body part, if further conservative care was needed, and why the applicant required the specific surgery recommended. Dr. Taher simply requested the surgery with no explanation. This does not constitute substantial medical evidence. Dr. Sollaccio's May 31, 2023 report was also considered in determining if there was substantial medical evidence for the requested surgery. Specifically, on page 7 of his report, Dr. Sollaccio indicates that he "discussed at length with the patient the diagnosis and treatment options." Dr. Sollaccio reports that the "treatment options include activity modifications, hand therapy exercises, night splinting, anti- inflammatory medications, possible corticosteroid injections, potential and surgery (carpal tunnel release, elbow ulnar nerve decompression)." Id. at page 7. Dr. Sollaccio then indicates that the "patient elects for surgery, beginning with right side." Id. at page 7. However, Dr. Sollaccio did not provide an explanation as to why the applicant was not going to undergo further conservative care, nor why he recommended the applicant undergo surgery. (Report, p. 3; citations to doctors' reports in original.)

secondary_treaterNot substantial evidence

Reviewed NCV study, discussed treatment options including surgery, but did not explain why further conservative care was not pursued or why surgery was recommended; report not substantial evidence.

Tribunal found Dr. Sollaccio's report lacked explanation for not pursuing further conservative care or for recommending surgery.

From the decision · page 4Dr. Taher did not provide an analysis as to why he was recommending the surgery for the applicant. The analysis should have included a summary of treatment rendered to the applicant for said body part, if further conservative care was needed, and why the applicant required the specific surgery recommended. Dr. Taher simply requested the surgery with no explanation. This does not constitute substantial medical evidence. Dr. Sollaccio's May 31, 2023 report was also considered in determining if there was substantial medical evidence for the requested surgery. Specifically, on page 7 of his report, Dr. Sollaccio indicates that he "discussed at length with the patient the diagnosis and treatment options." Dr. Sollaccio reports that the "treatment options include activity modifications, hand therapy exercises, night splinting, anti- inflammatory medications, possible corticosteroid injections, potential and surgery (carpal tunnel release, elbow ulnar nerve decompression)." Id. at page 7. Dr. Sollaccio then indicates that the "patient elects for surgery, beginning with right side." Id. at page 7. However, Dr. Sollaccio did not provide an explanation as to why the applicant was not going to undergo further conservative care, nor why he recommended the applicant undergo surgery. (Report, p. 3; citations to doctors' reports in original.)

ADJ16830722 · November 21, 2023

What the panel ordered

What was disputed, and how it came out

The facts that decided it

Your case already resembles someone else’s. Find whose.

What the panel did with the medical opinions

The rules the panel named

What proof carried it

About this page