Medical services to be provided
- services by providers not members of managed care organizations
- authorizing temporary disability compensation and making finding of impairment for disability rating purposes by certain providers
- review of disputed claims for medical services
- rules
Source:
Section 656.245 — Medical services to be provided; services by providers not members of managed care organizations; authorizing temporary disability compensation and making finding of impairment for disability rating purposes by certain providers; review of disputed claims for medical services; rules, https://www.oregonlegislature.gov/bills_laws/ors/ors656.html
.
Notes of Decisions
In general
Medical expenses are not compensable if they are result of pre-existing disability that contributed to award of permanent total disability but not result of compensable injury. Francoeur v. SAIF, 17 Or App 37, 520 P2d 477 (1974), Sup Ct review denied
Right to medical services for compensable injury does not terminate upon finding of no permanent disability. Bowser v. Evans Prod. Co., 270 Or 841, 530 P2d 44 (1974)
Where third party paid medical bills after insurer’s denial of claim, order could properly provide for reimbursement by insurer directly to third party. Francoeur v. SAIF, 20 Or App 604, 532 P2d 1148 (1975)
Lack of general acceptance by medical profession does not prevent finding that treatment method is reasonable and necessary. McGarry v. SAIF, 24 Or App 883, 547 P2d 654 (1976)
Payment of medical expenses for claim of aggravation does not amount to acceptance of aggravation claim and does not estop employer from contesting claim. Jacobson v. SAIF, 36 Or App 789, 585 P2d 1146 (1978), Sup Ct review denied
Insurer could refuse to pay for medical services rendered by claimant-selected out-of-state physician not approved by insurer. Rivers v. SAIF, 45 Or App 1105, 610 P2d 288 (1980)
Psychotherapy considered necessary by licensed psychologist, to whom claimant had been referred by physician for job counseling, was medical service for which carrier was responsible. Kemery v. SAIF, 51 Or App 813, 627 P2d 34 (1981)
Exploratory surgery performed as result of industrial injury was compensable even though surgery revealed noncompensable condition. Brooks v. D & R Timber, 55 Or App 688, 639 P2d 700 (1982)
Neither worker’s election to pursue third party recovery nor worker’s receipt of share of proceeds recovered absolved insurance carrier of duty to provide continued medical services. SAIF v. Parker, 61 Or App 47, 656 P2d 335 (1982)
Claimant impliedly can have only one attending physician at given time. Kemp v. Workers’ Comp. Dept., 65 Or App 659, 672 P2d 1343 (1983), modified 67 Or App 270, 677 P2d 725 (1984), Sup Ct review denied
If insurer gives claimant reasonable basis to believe that it has approved claimant’s choice of doctor, claimant need not obtain insurer’s consent to medical services that doctor provides for conditions that result from compensable injury. Mogliotti v. Reynolds Metals, 67 Or App 142, 676 P2d 919 (1984)
Insurer may not deny worker choice of treatments by restricting approval of out-of-state physician to certain categories of service provider. Reynaga v. Northwest Farm Bureau, 300 Or 255, 709 P2d 1071 (1985); Day v. S & S Pizza Co., 77 Or App 711, 714 P2d 275 (1986), Sup Ct review denied
Exposure to substance capable of causing occupational disease is not, by itself, injury absent subsequent development of occupational disease. Brown v. SAIF, 79 Or App 205, 717 P2d 1289 (1986), Sup Ct review denied
Even after claim closure, employer cannot deny its future responsibility for payment of medical services for previously accepted claim. Evanite Fiber Corp. v. Striplin, 99 Or App 353, 781 P2d 1262 (1989)
Where treatment request has previously been denied, claimant renewing request for treatment must show that condition has changed and that request is supported by new facts unavailable at time of earlier request. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Bird, 99 Or App 560, 783 P2d 33 (1989), Sup Ct review denied
Cost of palliative care is compensable where there is substantial evidence in record that service is reasonable and necessary as result of compensable injury. Elixir Industries v. Lange, 100 Or App 492, 786 P2d 1301 (1990)
Special review standard is allowable where items recommended for palliative care purposes are not usually viewed as medical services. Rager v. EBI Companies, 102 Or App 457, 795 P2d 573 (1990), modified 107 Or App 22, 810 P2d 1315 (1991)
Open status of claim does not prevent employer from denying request for ongoing care. Green Thumb, Inc. v. Basl, 106 Or App 98, 806 P2d 186 (1991)
Employer can deny current need for particular treatment and specific unpaid services, but cannot deny responsibility for possible future needs. Green Thumb, Inc. v. Basl, 106 Or App 98, 806 P2d 186 (1991)
Employers have only limited right to veto claimant’s choice of out-of-state physician, and only adequate basis for veto is when out-of-state doctor would be unlikely to comply with reporting requirements. Safeway Stores, Inc. v. Dupape, 106 Or App 126, 806 P2d 191 (1991), Sup Ct review denied
Claim is subject to statute provisions and rules making certain medical treatment noncompensable, notwithstanding that provisions and rules were adopted after time of injury. Thorpe v. Seige Logging, 115 Or App 335, 838 P2d 628 (1992), Sup Ct review denied
Where claimant fell at home and damaged sutures, claimant suffered no new “injury” or condition different from compensable carpal tunnel syndrome and emergency room treatment necessary to resuture wound is compensable. Roseburg Forest Products v. Ferguson, 117 Or App 601, 845 P2d 930 (1993), Sup Ct review denied
Where no new injury has occurred and compensable injury is material cause of need for continuing medical treatment, major contributing cause standard does not apply. Roseburg Forest Products v. Ferguson, 117 Or App 601, 845 P2d 930 (1993), Sup Ct review denied; Beck v. James River Corp., 124 Or App 484, 863 P2d 526 (1993), Sup Ct review denied; Fred Meyer, Inc. v. Crompton, 150 Or App 531, 946 P2d 1171 (1997)
Use of independent medical examination to impeach attending physician’s assessment of claimant’s disability was improper. Koitzsch v. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp., 125 Or App 666, 866 P2d 514 (1994)
Exclusive ability of attending physician to make findings on medical condition does not require acceptance of physician findings or prevent reliance on nonmedical evidence. Libbett v. Roseburg Forest Products, 130 Or App 50, 880 P2d 935 (1994), Sup Ct review denied
Where permanent total disability claim is based on unscheduled disability, impairment finding is not required and testimony of physician other than attending physician is permissible. EBI Companies v. Hunt, 132 Or App 128, 887 P2d 372 (1994)
Physician request for approval of noncompensable type of palliative care does not constitute “claim.” Hathaway v. Health Future Enterprises, 320 Or 383, 884 P2d 549 (1994); Nicholson v. Salem Area Transit, 320 Or 391, 884 P2d 864 (1994)
Director has exclusive power to review appropriateness of ongoing or proposed medical treatment. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Yon, 137 Or App 413, 904 P2d 645 (1995)
“Other related services” that are compensable are limited to services of same kind or class as those listed. Baar v. Fairview Training Center, 139 Or App 196, 911 P2d 1232 (1996), Sup Ct review denied
Requirement that director make physician change determination with “advice of one or more physicians” does not prohibit use of generalized medical guidelines in place of claimant-specific advice. Liberty Northwest Ins. Corp. v. Vasquez, 147 Or App 704, 938 P2d 237 (1997)
Referral for consultation does not place subsequent change to consulting physician outside limitation on attending physician changes. Country Mutual Insurance Co. v. Mendoza, 148 Or App 397, 939 P2d 674 (1997)
Where remodeling of claimant’s residence is reasonable and necessary to further claimant’s self-sufficient status, remodeling services are compensable medical services. SAIF v. Glubrecht, 156 Or App 339, 967 P2d 490 (1998)
Provisions for use of managed care organization or in-lieu services apply to all forms of claims, not just initial or aggravation claims. SAIF v. Reid, 160 Or App 383, 982 P2d 14 (1999); Travelers Indemnity of Illinois v. Curtis, 195 Or App 305, 97 P3d 673 (2004), Sup Ct review denied
Limitation on compensability of treatment rendered by medical service provider not qualifying as attending physician applies to both accepted and denied claims. SAIF v. Jensen, 183 Or App 439, 52 P3d 1118 (2002)
Where work-related injury is fact of consequence regarding claimant’s need of medical services, injury may be “material” regardless of amount of contribution. Mize v. Comcast Corp-AT&T Broadband, 208 Or App 563, 145 P3d 315 (2006)
Where prescribed type of modified vehicle was uniquely suited to accommodating claimant’s disability resulting from compensable injury, vehicle was medical service. Sedgwick Claims Management Services v. Jones, 214 Or App 446, 166 P3d 547 (2007)
Where treatment is necessitated in material part by accepted condition, treatment of condition other than accepted condition is compensable. SAIF v. Martinez, 219 Or App 182, 182 P3d 873 (2008); SAIF v. Sprague, 221 Or App 413, 190 P3d 443 (2008), aff’d 346 Or 661, 217 P3d 644 (2009)
Medical services to determine cause or extent of compensable injury are compensable even if condition discovered is not compensable. SAIF v. Martinez, 219 Or App 182, 182 P3d 873 (2008)
Compensability of medical service is governed by causation standard that applies to condition that particular service is “directed to.” Slater v. SAIF Corp. (In re Slater), 287 Or App 84, 400 P3d 969 (2017), Sup Ct review denied
Where section requires insurer to provide medical services for conditions caused in material part by injury, term “injury” means work accident that caused medical condition and resulted in need for medical services. Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co, 365 Or 26, 441 P3d 573 (2019)
First sentence of this section, which governs coverage for medical services for ordinary conditions, requires evaluation of whether medical services were for original condition caused by workplace accident, not evaluation regarding whether medical services were directed to medical conditions caused by original condition. Edwards v. Cavenham Forest Industries, 312 Or App 153, 492 P3d 750 (2021), Sup Ct review denied
Burden of proof
Frequency of treatment cannot be limited so long as treatment is reasonable and necessary. West v. SAIF, 74 Or App 317, 702 P2d 1148 (1985)
Claimant bears burden of proof with regard to required frequency of treatment. Freres Lumber Co., Inc. v. Murphy, 101 Or App 92, 789 P2d 674 (1990), Sup Ct review denied
Attorney General Opinions
Services rendered by clinical social worker independently and not at direction of doctor or physician as constituting medical services required to be provided claimants, (1981) Vol 42, p 167
Law Review Citations
27 WLR 81 (1991); 32 WLR 217 (1996)