Employee can't connect heart attack to work-related epidural injection

A Florida judge of compensation claims held that the claimant failed to prove that her emergency room treatment for a mild heart attack was caused by an injection treatment she received from her treating doctor.

Case name: Perez v. CVS Corp., 15 FLWCLB 182 (Fla. JCC, Orlando 2008).

What it means: The fact that an ailment develops soon after an employee receives treatment for a work-related injury may not be enough to establish that the ailment was causally related to the treatment. Convincing evidence of a causal nexus is required, such as probative medical evidence or persuasive expert testimony.

Delaware: Division announces workers' compensation rate (09/10/12)
Ohio: Outpatient medication formulary may restrict some drugs (12/22/11)
Washington: Hearings to focus on cranes in construction work (09/29/11)
Florida: Division clarifies loss data reporting (10/06/11)
Oregon: Bulletin addresses worker leasing companies (11/01/12)

Summary: An assistant manager sustained cervical injuries when a box struck her head and neck. She received an epidural steroidal injection in her neck to treat her work injury and two injections for pain. Later that day, she suffered a mild heart attack that required evaluation and treatment. The employer/carrier's independent medical examiner testified that he performed an EKG before the heart attack, which revealed a complete block, commonly associated with underlying heart disease. The JCC found that the treatment the claimant received at the emergency room and the eight days of care thereafter were attributable to an unrelated heart condition. As a result, the E/C was not responsible for payment of the related medical bills.

December 16, 2008

Newsletter Sign-up