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.
QMERejected
Initially opined no apportionment to Kerlan-Jobe employment, later apportioned 25% of condition to subsequent employers including Kerlan-Jobe without sufficient basis, findings lacked substantial medical evidence.
The Appeals Board found Dr. Sohn's reports lacked substantial medical evidence on apportionment due to vague, conclusory findings and failure to explain causation adequately.
From the decision · page 7Upon review of the record, we agree with the WCJ that the reports of Dr. Sohn are lacking
in substantial medical evidence on the issue of apportionment. In a report dated February 4, 2015,
Dr. Sohn indicated that "Kerlan-Jobe would not be considered apportionable. The condition is
strictly related to her employment at McDonnell-Douglas/Boeing." (Exhibit CC, p. 14.) However,
in a subsequent report dated September 23, 2016, Dr. Sohn reversed his opinion without providing
a sufficient basis. He alleged that applicant got "worse after working at Hematology Consultants
and later at Kerlan and Jobe" and apportioned 25% of applicant's condition to both employers but
conceded that applicant performed "relatively easy type work" at Kerlan-Jobe. (Exhibit BB, p. 33.)
Nonetheless, he held that applicant's subsequent work, combined with applicant's apparent
"fragility," led to worsening of applicant's condition.
QMEGiven great weight
Found applicant's impairment/disability was due to the initial specific injury and its progression, with no apportionment to subsequent employment.
Dr. Kim took an accurate history, examined the applicant, reviewed records, and explained why the initial injury caused the condition, supporting no apportionment to later employment.
From the decision · page 7CIGA argues that it is the reporting of Dr. Kim and Dr. Watkin that are lacking in
substantial medical evidence on the issue of apportionment. Based upon our review of the record,
however, we find that both doctors took an accurate and adequate history, thoroughly examined
the applicant, reviewed all medical records provided, and explained how and why the alleged
cumulative injury did not contribute to applicant's complaints and why the original July 30, 1990
industrial injury led to continued worsening.
QMEGiven great weight · orthopedic
Found it medically probable that the permanent disability was due to factors predating Kerlan-Jobe employment, no evidence of continuous trauma injury, and condition was a compensable consequence of the 1990 injury.
Dr. Watkin's reports were thorough, reviewed extensive records including Dr. Sohn's, and consistently found no injury from Kerlan-Jobe employment, supporting the WCJ's findings.
From the decision · page 7CIGA argues that it is the reporting of Dr. Kim and Dr. Watkin that are lacking in
substantial medical evidence on the issue of apportionment. Based upon our review of the record,
however, we find that both doctors took an accurate and adequate history, thoroughly examined
the applicant, reviewed all medical records provided, and explained how and why the alleged
cumulative injury did not contribute to applicant's complaints and why the original July 30, 1990
industrial injury led to continued worsening.