New York: Continued Short-Term Med Approved in Spite of Passage of 16 Years

A New York appellate court recently affirmed the Board's decision that claimant’s continued use of Amrix—a muscle relaxant—was medically necessary in spite of the employer/carrier’s argument that the Board's Non-Acute Pain Management Guidelines recommended only short-term use of the medication and claimant’s back, right shoulder and left hip injury occurred in 2000, sixteen years before the carrier filed its objection. The court observed that claimant's treating physician testified that the effects of the drug vary on a patient-to-patient basis and that the continued use of Amrix had been successful in treating claimant's muscle spasms and related pain. Specifically, the physician testified that continued use of Amrix had allowed claimant to perform the activities of daily living and to continue working as a nurse. In light of the foregoing, the court concluded substantial evidence supported the Board’s finding that continued use was medically necessary.

Thomas A. Robinson, J.D., the Feature National Columnist for the LexisNexis Workers’ Compensation eNewsletter, is co-author of Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law (LexisNexis).

LexisNexis Online Subscribers: Citations below link to Lexis Advance.

See Matter of Byrnes v New Is. Hosp., 2018 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 8314 (3d Dept., Dec. 6, 2018)

See generally Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, § 94.03.

Source: Larson’s Workers’ Compensation Law, the nation’s leading authority on workers’ compensation law