CompFox AI Summary
In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the initial denial of the applicant's appeal concerning tinnitus masking treatment. The Board found that the Administrative Director's (AD) Independent Medical Review (IMR) determination was invalid because the reviewer failed to follow the statutorily mandated hierarchy of standards for assessing medical necessity. Specifically, the IMR reviewer improperly relied on Medicare guidelines without first considering peer-reviewed scientific and medical evidence, as required by Labor Code section 4610.5(c)(2). Consequently, the case was remanded to the AD for a new IMR by a different reviewer.
Full Decision Text1 Pages
In this workers' compensation case, the Appeals Board granted reconsideration and reversed the initial denial of the applicant's appeal concerning tinnitus masking treatment. The Board found that the Administrative Director's (AD) Independent Medical Review (IMR) determination was invalid because the reviewer failed to follow the statutorily mandated hierarchy of standards for assessing medical necessity. Specifically, the IMR reviewer improperly relied on Medicare guidelines without first considering peer-reviewed scientific and medical evidence, as required by Labor Code section 4610.5(c)(2). Consequently, the case was remanded to the AD for a new IMR by a different reviewer.
Read the full decision
Join + legal professionals. Create a free account to access the complete text of this decision and search our entire database.