Public Decisions | The Appeal Commission

Decision #38/00 - Type: Workers Compensation

Preamble

An Appeal Panel review was held on September 23, 1999, at the request of the claimant. The Appeal Panel discussed this further on December 21, 1999.

Issue

Whether or not the impairment has been correctly determined to be 2.2%; and

Whether or not the monetary award of $540.00 is correct.

Decision

The claimant is entitled to an impairment rating of 6%; and

The monetary award of $540.00 was incorrect.

Decision: Unanimous

Background

While employed as a "set up person" on May 26, 1997, the claimant injured his index and middle fingers of his right hand when they were caught in a die. The claimant was subsequently diagnosed with a traumatic amputation of the right distal phalange of the third finger and a crush injury to the right second finger. The claim was accepted by the Workers Compensation Board (WCB) and benefits were paid accordingly.

On May 27, 1999, a WCB impairment award medical advisor examined the claimant’s right index and middle fingers with regard to a Permanent Partial Impairment (PPI) award. The medical advisor recorded the following calculations at the time of examination:

“For the right index finger:
Please note that for the purpose of the following calculations, the range of motion (ROM) was felt to be functional and as such ½ the permanent impairment rating (PIR) value was used:
DIP joint
Loss of ROM is 60 – 55 = 5 degrees.
The PIR at this joint, using the 2-finger chart, is 3%.
Therefore, the permanent impairment calculation (PIC) is 5 / 60 x ½ = 0.1%.
PIP joint
Loss of ROM is 100 – 95 = 5 degrees.
The PIR at this joint, using the 2-finger chart, is 3%.
Therefore, the PIC is 5 / 100 x ½ x 3 = 0.1%.
MP joint
Loss of ROM is 85 – 75 = 10 degrees.
The PIR at this joint, using the 1-finger chart, is 1%.
For the right middle finger:
DIP joint
The amputation value of 2.4%, using the 2-finger chart, is recommended in this case.
PIP joint
Loss of ROM is 100 – 40 = 60 degrees.
The PIR at this joint, using the 2-finger chart, is 2.4%.
Therefore, the PIC is 60 / 100 x ½ x 2.4 = 0.7%.
Loss of length at the middle phalanx is calculated as 2.5 – 2.1 = 0.4 cm.
Therefore, the PIC is 0.4 x 2.5 x ½ x 2.4 = 0.2%.”

The claimant then had photographs taken of his right hand with regard to a cosmetic impairment. The consensus opinion of three reviewers was that the claimant’s cosmetic impairment related to the compensable injuries would rate a PPI of 1%. This would apply in addition to any other previously rated impairment.

The sum totals of the impairment values equated to a 2.2% permanent impairment rating.

On June 25, 1999, the claimant was advised that he was entitled to an award based on an impairment rating of 2.2% which resulted in a one time payment of $540.00. This was in accordance with Sections 38(2) and 38(3) of the Workers Compensation Act (the Act). In July 1999, the claimant appealed the decision to Review Office.

On July 23, 1999, Review Office determined that the impairment value of 2.2% had been correctly determined and was in accordance with the WCB’s adopted schedule of impairment ratings. Review Office also confirmed that the lump sum offered to the claimant of $540.00 was correct and was in accordance with Section 38 of the Act. According to Review Office, there was no evidence to support either an increase in the impairment rating or an increase in the monetary award.

On August 15, 1999, the claimant appealed Review Office’s decision and a non-oral file review was held at the Appeal Commission on September 23, 1999. Following discussion of the case, the Appeal Panel requested that a WCB impairment awards medical advisor reassess the claimant’s PPI award, which later took place on November 26, 1999. Based on the examination findings and using the combined values chart, the impairment awards medical advisor calculated the claimant’s total PPI for both the right index and right middle fingers at 8.8% rounded to 9.0%.

On December 6, 1999, the claimant was provided with a copy of the November 26, 1999, examination report and was asked to provide comments. On December 20, 1999, a copy of the claimant’s submission was forwarded to the Panel.

On December 21, 1999, and January 12, 2000, the Panel met to discuss the case and requested further clarification from the WCB’s healthcare services branch with regard to the Impairment Awards Medical Advisor’s calculations of November 26, 1999. A response dated March 27, 2000, was forwarded to the claimant for comment. On April 14, 2000, the Panel met to render its final decision.

Reasons

After several requests for clarification as to the method employed in the calculation of the claimant's impairment rating, we received a memorandum dated March 27th, 2000 from the Acting Director of Healthcare. We carefully reviewed this memo and are satisfied that this latest calculation of the claimant's impairment was done correctly in accordance with the WCB's policy and rating schedule. The revised calculation was as follows:

The total impairment rating for the index finger would be:

PIP joint
20 ÷ 100 x 3 ÷ 2 = 0.3

MP joint
10 ÷ 90 x 1.5 ÷ 2 = 0.08

Total impairment rating for the right index finger is 1.55% = 2%.

The total impairment for the middle finger would be:

Loss of range of motion at the PIP joint 100 - 80 = 20
20 ÷ 100 x 2.4 ÷ 2 = 0.24%

Total for right middle finger would be 2.64% = 3%.

The cosmetic impairment has been given a 1% rating. Based on the above calculations and using the current Rating Schedule and employing the "2 finger" chart the total rating would be 1+ 2 + 3 = 6%.

We find therefore that the impairment rating of 2.2% is not correct and that the claimant is entitled to a rating of 6%. In addition, we further find that the monetary award of $540.00 was also incorrect and will need to be recalculated.

Panel Members

R. W. MacNeil, Presiding Officer
A. Finkel, Commissioner
R. Frisken, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, B. Miller

R. W. MacNeil - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)

Signed at Winnipeg this 19th day of April, 2000

Back