CLAIM NO. E704597
Before the Arkansas Workers’ Compensation Commission
OPINION FILED JANUARY 13, 1999
Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas.
Claimant represented by the HONORABLE RICK SELLARS, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Respondents represented by the HONORABLE WALTER MURRAY, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas.
Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Affirmed.
OPINION AND ORDER
The claimant appeals an opinion and order filed by the administrative law judge on July 24, 1998. In that opinion and order, the administrative law judge found that the claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a compensable back injury as a result of a specific incident that occurred on April 11, 1997. After conducting ade novo review of the entire record, we find that the administrative law judge’s decision must be affirmed.
The claimant was employed by the respondent employer and assigned the task of providing in-home assistance to elderly or disabled persons. The claimant has alleged that she suffered a compensable injury to her lower back on April 11, 1997, as a result of a lifting incident that date or as a result of a driving incident later that same date.
According to the claimant’s testimony, on the date in question, she was attempting to assist a client, who was bedfast, from the client’s bed to a wheelchair. The client was then transferred into another room where she was helped onto a couch. Later, the client was returned to her bed. The claimant testified that, while moving the client, she felt a pain in her lower back which she described as a pinching or tightening sensation in her buttocks and radiating into her leg. While there were some questions raised during her testimony as to exactly when the onset of symptoms began, the claimant insisted that the pain began while she was moving the client. The claimant also testified that while driving home, she was required to forcefully brake her car and that when doing so, she felt another onset of back pain.
The incidents described by the claimant occurred on a Friday. During her testimony, the claimant indicated that after arriving home on Friday evening, her back was sore but she did not believe that it was a serious injury. According to the claimant, on Sunday evening, when she was getting dressed to go out to dinner, she experienced a severe onset of pain. The claimant testified that, as she was attempting to open a door, she felt a sudden onset of severe pain in her lower back which caused her to fall to the floor.
The claimant first sought treatment at the emergency room at Lawrence Memorial Hospital on Sunday, April 13, 1997. This report notes an acute onset of pain after the claimant bent over to put on her hose (with an indication that this had happened once before), but does not contain any reference to any symptoms related to a prior lifting incident or automobile incident. An emergency room report from St. Bernard’s Hospital dated April 14, 1994, likewise notes a history of pain after a fall on Sunday, but does not contain any reference to any symptoms associated with a lifting incident or an automobile accident the prior Friday.
The first medical report which records any reference to an incident prior to the Sunday bending incident is an April 16, 1997, St. Bernard’s emergency room report which records a history of some back pain in connection with a motor vehicle accident. That report again makes no mention of any patient-lifting incident associated with the claimant’s symptoms.
The first medical report to reference any patient-lifting incident was prepared by Dr. Ricca on May 22, 1997. In that report, he records a history from the claimant as follows:
In talking with Ms. Burton, she tells me that her symptoms began after she had dried off after a bath and was getting her clothes from the top of a dresser. When she tells me this today, I do remember her telling me in the past, as well. She was not bending, twisting or straining at the onset of her symptoms. She states that while she was getting her clothing, her right lower extremity suddenly gave way on her.
Ms. Burton reports that the only stresses she has had to her lower back prior to the onset of her symptoms occurred two days previously. One was when she was changing a client’s bed. She actually was changing the bed itself, not just the linens, and had to pick up the patient, move her out of bed, put a new bed in the room and put the patient back into the new bed. She says she believes she may have stressed her low back at this time. The second incident is what you are aware of — when she reports that she had to slam her brakes on suddenly on the way home.
You asked if I can say with a degree of medical certainty that the slamming on of her brakes to avoid another automobile caused her disc rupture. Unfortunately, I cannot do this. In general, stresses on disc space are associated with bending, rotation or severe axial loading. Sitting stationary and slamming on the brakes, to my knowledge, does not apply a great deal of force to the disc space itself. Moving the patient in bed actually seems to me to be more of a reasonable stress that could cause the patient a ruptured disc, which then could become symptomatic a few days later. Unfortunately, however, with the information I have, I cannot identify with a degree of medical certainty the particular cause of her disc rupture.
On Monday, April 14, 1997, the claimant’s husband contacted her immediate supervisor, Ms. Cynthia Nichols, and advised her that the claimant would not be able to work because of her back problems. The claimant also apparently spoke with her employer either on that day or the following Tuesday. Testimony regarding this conversation was provided not only by the claimant but by Ms. Nichols as well. There was some dispute as to whether Ms. Nichols was advised about the incident at the client’s home. However, Ms. Nichols did state that she was told about the onset of symptoms when the claimant applied the brakes to her automobile on April 11, 1997.
The claimant also provided a recorded statement to Ms. Jennifer Shelton, a claims adjuster for the respondent’s third party administration company, on April 22, 1997. According to both Ms. Shelton and the transcript of the conversation, the claimant did not mention any injury while lifting a client, but did relate the onset of back pain that occurred when she braked her automobile while driving home.
After conducting a de novo review of the entire record, we find that the claimant has failed to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained her disc herniation as a result of the alleged patient-lifting incident or as a result of applying the brakes to her automobile. With regard to the braking incident, we note that the claimantdid place potential significance to symptoms she experienced at that time in the history that she provided on April 16, 1997. However, Dr. Ricca’s May 22, 1997 report indicates that sitting and applying force to brakes does not apply the necessary and appropriate force to the disc space to cause a disc rupture.
With regard to the claimant’s assertion that she sustained a disc injury as a result of an April 11, 1997 lifting incident, we, as did the administrative law judge, believe that it is highly significant that the claimant did not ever mention any lifting incidents to her initial treating physicians when explaining to them how her symptoms developed. Rather, she only mentioned a fall that occurred at home. We believe that it is unlikely that, had the claimant suffered an onset of symptoms while lifting a patient as she now alleges, she would have failed to advise her doctors of the lifting incident when they began treating her for her back problems.
Likewise, we find that the claimant did not mention the lifting incident to Ms. Nichols or Ms. Shelton, the claims adjuster for the respondent carrier. Once again, we believe that, had the claimant’s injury actually occurred while moving a patient as she now asserts, she would have advised her employer, as well as the claims adjuster, of that fact. Likewise, as we interpret Dr. Ricca’s May 27, 1997 report, the claimant did not at that time indicate that she experienced symptoms while lifting the patient on April 11, 1997. Instead, as we interpret Dr. Ricca’s report, the claimant was only noting “stresses” on April 11, 1997, that preceded her symptom onset of April 13, 1997.
In short, we find that the claimant’s current assertion that she sustained a work-related back injury on April 11, 1997, is inconsistent with the history that she provided her initial treating physicians. Moreover, we find that the claimant’s testimony as to when her symptoms developed is inconsistent with the testimony of Ms. Nichols, the testimony of Ms. Shelton, and with the contemporaneous medical records. On this record, we accord little weight to the claimant’s uncorroborated testimony, and we find that the claimant failed to prove by a preponderance of the credible evidence that she sustained a compensable back injury on April 11, 1997. Therefore, for the reasons discussed herein, we find that the decision of the administrative law judge must be, and hereby is, affirmed.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
_____________________________
ELDON F. COFFMAN, Chairman
_______________________________ MIKE WILSON, Commissioner
Commissioner Humphrey dissents.