Changes in the PQME Process: What you need to know
By
Zachary A. Madison Everyone remembers the old days
before SB 899, where each party could pick their own
QME and the case would either be tried on the two
reports or settle based on a split. However with the
passage of SB 899 parties must either agree to use
an AME or request a panel of QMEs from the DWC
medical unit.
Recently there have been some updates to this
process which can be found in Sections 30-39 of the
California Code of Regulations. Now the question
becomes, how can I best use these new regulations to
my advantage?
First, if at all possible, the defense should be
the first one to file for the three member panel.
Per the administrative regulations the first party
to file for the panel list is the party who has the
right to designate the speciality. In this
situation, the defense should be careful to note
regulation 30(d)(1) - (d)(3). Where there has been a
90 day delay the defense can only file for a panel
QME to determine whether a claim is compensable
within that first 90 days and before the claim is
actually denied.
Where liability on the claim is at issue, the
defense should file for a panel under Labor Code
4060 immediately, within the first 90 days of the
claim, in order to determine compensability of the
claim. Once the claim is denied, only the applicant
may file for a panel where a dispute arises
regarding the compensability of the claim.
Basically, if there is a compensability issue where
the industrial causation of the applicant's injury
is at issue, the defense should file for the panel
at the beginning of the 90 days. Otherwise, they
will be forced into a situation where they have to
deny the case prior to expiration of the 90 day
period, which will eliminate their right to obtain
the panel to determine compensability. Essentially,
under the new regulations, the defense should tread
very carefully when denying a claim for medical
reasons. If the defense denies the claim prior to
filing for a panel QME to determine compensability
based on a medical reason, they will lose there
right to ask for a Panel on that issue.
The situation the defense needs to avoid is
denying a case immediately for lack of medical
evidence. If this is done, the defense loses its
right to ask for the panel QME to determine
compensability issues. Later on, if a treater’s
report surfaces, which finds industrial causation,
the defense could find itself without a way to
counter the treater’s opinion.
Once a claim is accepted, a panel will only be
issued if there is a dispute under Labor Code 4061
or 4062 regarding permanent disability or medical
treatment. If the case is accepted at the outset,
then the defense should try to file for the panel
before the applicant does but it is not necessary
for them to do so in order to preserve their right
to file for a panel to resolve a dispute of
permanent disability or medical treatment.
Once a panel has been received, if the speciality
is incorrect or the list of physicians is less than
acceptable there are several strategies that can be
employed to either get the DWC Medical Unit to
change the medical speciality or issue a different
panel.
The default option for the Medical Unit is to
issue a panel in the same speciality as the treating
physician. However, applicant attorneys routinely
file panel QME requests for pain management
physicians or chiropractors. In most situations,
this is not a good choice.
Under CCR section 31.1, if a represented injured
worker requests a speciality different from the
treater they must provide documentation to support
the specialty request. If they do not, an objection
letter should be sent to the DWC Medical Unit
requesting that the panel be issued in the same
speciality as the treating physician. Our office has
had success in getting the DWC to issue a new panel
by following this strategy.
Where this doesn't work, it should not be
forgotten that there are time limits to setting and
obtaining an appointment. If the applicant doesn't
set an appointment within 10 days of obtaining the
panel list, the defense may set the appointment.
This is important because the party who set the
appointment has the right to waive the time
extension requirement. The QME must be available
within 60 days but a 30 day extension can be
granted. So, if the applicant timely sets the
appointment, the QME will likely have 90 days to set
it. If the applicant fails to timely set the
appointment, the defense can set the appointment and
demand the appointment within 60 days. If the QME
cannot provide an appointment within the 60 days,
then a new panel can be requested.
There are other ways of getting a different panel
issued in both represented and unrepresented cases.
One should always refer the Labor Code and
administrative regulations as the above is not
comprehensive. Of course, our office is always
willing to answer any questions with regards to the
above issues.
|