 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Horner Enterprises v. Allen6/1/2005
NOT DESIGNATED FOR PUBLICATION
Appellant Horner Enterprises appeals from the order of the Arkansas Workers' Compensation Commission awarding temporary-total-disability benefits and medical benefits to appellee Michelle Allen. On appeal, appellant argues that substantial evidence does not support the Commission's finding that "her current back problems are causally related to her compensable low-back injury ." We affirm.
According to the medical records, on February 18, 2001, appellee, while working for appellant, slipped and fell. Appellant accepted the claim as compensable and provided some benefits. An MRI performed February 19, 2001, showed, according to Dr. Cyril Raben, "disc space desication and a bulge at L5-S1." Further, it showed an "abnormal high signal in the anterior aspect of the inferior end plate of L5 in a modic-type change fashion indicating perhaps an acute fracture of an end plate...." He assessed her as having lumbar radicular syndrome. On November 20, 2001, appellee underwent a disc-space injection at L5-S1, with an injection bilaterally at each level. A CT discogram performed on December 27, 2001, showed "a mild disc bulge with associated fissuring and clefts within the nucleus pulposus and inner annulus, resulting in mild central canal stenosis and mild bilateral neural foraminal stenosis at L5-S1." A clinic note of January 8, 2002, by Dr. Raben described it as "a left-sided disc herniation with fissure at L5-S1" and referred appellee to Dr. Harold Chakales for an IDET. On March 14, 2002, an administrative law judge awarded appellee additional medical treatment, and appellant did not appeal from that decision.
On May 29, 2002, she was seen by Dr. Chakales, and he diagnosed her as having " umbar disc syndrome with internal disc derangement, L5-S1, primarily on the left." Appellee still had low-back pain and sciatica on June 26, 2002, and Dr. Chakales ordered an IDET. Her sciatica was better by November 6, 2002, two months after the IDET. On December 16, 2002, she reported to Dr. Chakales "some left-and right-sided pain." He noted that she had "severe intractable sciatica on the left side." He also noted that the IDET had helped, but she still had problems.
On March 17, 2003, Dr. Chakales stated that appellee had "a recurrence of some of her sciatica on the right side." He noted that she had responded to the IDET for a period of time, but her condition had deteriorated. On June 24, 2003, he again saw appellee and wrote that she was having low-back pain and that she "may have a recurrent disc." He noted that she had an IDET, which was effective for a while, but now she was having more pain. On October 6, 2003, appellee returned with "complaints of severe intractable sciatica." He wrote that she was doing well in June, but she now reported severe low-back pain with pain across her back and radiating into her right leg. An MRI was performed on October 27, 2003, which showed at L5-S1 " isc dessication with large broad based rightward disc displacement resulting in high-grade asymmetric encroachment upon the right preforaminal space." Also noted were the " uggestion of caudal migration of disc material" and a " oderate bilateral foraminal encroachment."
In a letter dated October 27, 2003, Dr. Chakales wrote that appellee did well following the IDET and had some relief from low-back pain, with improvement of her sciatica by November of 2002. He noted, however that she "developed intractable sciatica on the left side." He further noted that she now had "some recurrence of her right-sided sciatica." He wrote that he "felt in June that she possibly had a recurrence of her herniation at the lumbosacral level." He then stated that " n MRI of the
Page 1 2 Arkansas Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|