The Appeal CommissionThe Workers Compensation Act of Manitoba

Preamble

A non-oral file review was held on February 21, 2001, at the request of the claimant.

Issue

Whether or not the claimant is entitled to wage loss benefits beyond December 4, 1999.

Decision

That the claimant is not entitled to wage loss benefits beyond December 4, 1999.

Background

While employed as a hardware clerk on October 25, 1999, the claimant fell to the floor when the chair she sat in broke. On October 29, 1999, the attending physician noted pain in the upper back and neck. The diagnosis rendered was muscle spasm and questionable thoracic spondylosis. The claimant was referred for physiotherapy treatments directed towards her neck region. The claim was accepted by the Workers Compensation Board (WCB) and benefits were paid between October 27, 1999 and December 6, 1999 when the claimant returned to work.

In early March 2000, the claimant wrote to the WCB stating that she was unable to work due to a recurrence of her previous injury.

On March 23, 2000, a WCB adjudicator spoke with the claimant. The claimant stated that she was not 100% when she returned to work in December 1999 and that she tried to work through her pain. As the pain in her neck wasn’t getting any better she decided to see her physician for treatment. The claimant was of the view that her job duties which consisted of stocking and unpacking merchandise, working cash, loading feed or the occasional block of salt, aggravated her neck condition. There was no new accident to account for her difficulties.

Medical documentation was received from an orthopedic specialist dated March 13, 2000. The specialist made reference to the October 25, 1999, compensable accident and stated that the claimant complained of pain at the back side of her neck for no apparent reason since the beginning of February 2000. Examination of the cervical spine, both shoulder joints and back revealed full range of motion. Sensation, muscle power and reflexes were noted to be normal in the upper limbs. X-rays of the cervical spine were considered to be normal. The specialist concluded that there were no positive physical findings to make any firm diagnosis. A bone scan was subsequently arranged and was later found to be normal.

In a follow up report dated March 30, 2000, the orthopaedic specialist stated that the claimant’s upper back and neck pain was overall better. The claimant always seemed to have some discomfort and was able to move her neck. Motion to the right as she turned her head bothered the claimant’s upper back and lower neck. There was full range of motion of the shoulder joints and sensation, muscle power and reflexes were all considered normal. The claimant was advised to continue with gentle exercises.

At the request of primary adjudication, a WCB medical advisor reviewed the case on April 18, 2000. The medical advisor put forth the opinion that there was no cause and effect relationship between the claimant’s current condition and the compensable accident. The medical advisor based his opinion on the following reports:

• a November 30, 1999, progress report whereby the physician stated there were no physical findings; and

• a physiotherapist’s report dated December 9, 1999, which indicated the claimant “returned to work without complications”.

In a decision letter to the claimant dated April 18, 2000, primary adjudication stated that the WCB was unable to accept responsibility for any time loss from work or any ongoing medical treatment. Based on the weight of evidence, including history and mechanism of injury, diagnosis, expected symptom duration, etc., primary adjudication concluded that the claimant had recovered from the effects of her October 25, 1999, compensable injury. On May 2, 2000, the claimant appealed the decision to Review Office.

In a May 19, 2000 decision, Review Office determined that no responsibility could be assumed for any time loss from work beyond December 4, 1999. Review Office did not accept that the claimant’s pain complaints in February 2000 would have disabled her and made her unfit to work. Review Office stated there was no indication that there had been an ongoing cause and effect relationship between the complaints in February 2000 and the injury of October 25, 1999. On December 11, 2000, the claimant appealed Review Office’s decision and a non-oral file review was convened.

Reasons

The claimant discontinued work in early 2000 and was referred to an orthopedic specialist. His findings dated March 13, 2000 show a full range of motion at the cervical spine, shoulder joints and in her back. He notes that motions of the cervical spine are free and painless. X-rays of the cervical spine and a bone scan were noted to be normal.

Based on the medical evidence on file, we conclude on a balance of probabilities that the claimant had recovered from the effects of the compensable injury of October 27, 1999 by December 4, 1999. The claimant did not demonstrate a loss of earning capacity from her workplace injury after this date. Therefore, no responsibility can be assumed for wage loss benefits beyond December 4, 1999. We support the Review Office decision of May 17,2000.

Accordingly the appeal is denied.

Panel Members

T. Sargeant, Presiding Officer
A. Finkel, Commissioner
M. Day, Commissioner

Recording Secretary, B. Miller

T. Sargeant - Presiding Officer
(on behalf of the panel)

Signed at Winnipeg this 7th day of March, 2001