LURE TO ADEQUATELY COMPENSATE FORENSIC DOCTORS HAS CAUSED A MAJOR DECREASE IN QME’s AND AME’s

by | Oct 9, 2018

The California Workers’ Com­pensation system is unique regarding the benefits offered and the process involved in proving a case to enable in­jured workers to obtain access to medical care. The legis­lation enacted has established a template which involves for­ensic doctors who eval­uate injured workers to determine whether their injuries are job-related (and assess what per­centage is work-related if ap­por­tionment is involved), and opine as to the medical care they need, the period of time they are to be remain off work, and the level of impairment resulting from their injuries.  Compensation for these doc­tors is paid according to a formula called the Medical-Legal Fee Schedule.

 

The doctors who participate in these forensic evaluations must possess unique education ex­pe­rience and medical creden­tials before they can attain the title of Qualified Medical Evalu­ator (QME) or Agreed Medical Evaluator (AME).  The avail­ability of doctors for these posi­tions — QME and AME — has decreased, and one rationale is the complexity involved in fulfilling these roles, but cer­tainly another major factor is the inadequate compensation doctors receive for doing this valuable work.

 

The current version of the Medical-Legal Fee Schedule attempts to minimize forensic doctors’ ability to obtain rea­son­able compensation. As a result, fewer doctors want to participate in the AME-QME protocol because they believe the financial benefit they will receive from such par­tici­pation is inadequate.

 

It is very important to recognize that much studious work is required by these doctors to correctly determine causation for many industrial injuries and to support their determinations with empirical data. Then, when a condition has been determined to be job-related, forensic doctors have the next task of opining as to the medi­cal care they believe is reason­able and necessary, the length of time they believe an injured employee should be taken off work, and, potentially, the level of the worker’s impairment.

 

Obtaining a forensic evalu­a­tor’s opinion based on substan­tial evidence enhances the time­li­ness of the injured worker receiving the care which is needed. If forensic doctors do not delve into their cases to the depth required, defense attor­neys can take issue as to the medical substantiality of the doctors’ evidence and depose the doctors accordingly, there­by denying or delaying injured workers access to the care they need.

 

In a 5/16/18 letter from Jason Marcus, Esq., President of the California Ap­pli­cants’ At­tor­neys

 

Association, Mr. Marcus cor­rectly states:

 

“Initially, medical-legal fees must be sufficient to attract qualified physicians to provide quality evaluations as QMEs and AMEs. In the last five years, the availability of physi­cians to conduct medical-legal evaluations in the State of Cali­fornia has decreased dramati­cally by 20% (see CWCI report on changes in QME population and Medical Legal Trends, February 2018).  In some med­i­­cal specialties there are not even five physicians certified in the requested specialty to is­sue a Panel QME list.  In other medical specialties, the injured worker is provided a list of phy­si­cians ranging geo­graphically from San Francisco to Santa Ana to Sacramento while the injured worker resides in San Diego.  In more rural areas, injured workers have to drive more than four hours to attend an evaluation.  In addition, as noted in other recent studies, there has been a ‘graying’ of currently avail­able QMEs who upon retire­ment are not being replaced.  This will contribute to a further decrease in avail­able QMEs in the next five years.”

 

CAAA President Marcus cor­rectly identifies current prob­lems in the QME-AME system resulting from the decrease in qualified physicians who want to be forensic evaluators in this system because of the lack of adequate compen­sation they re­ceive for taking on this role.

 

It takes very little analysis to recognize the manipulation in which many insur­ance carriers and self-insured employers are engaging to deny or delay care to many injured workers and force them to access medical care under their own health plan because of the current system’s fail­ure to attract suf­ficient competent physicians to perform forensic evaluations as QMEs and AMEs. Clearly, action is needed to rectify this unacceptable situation and stop the downward slide in the pool of QME/AMEs so injured workers can be evaluated by competent forensic doctors in their geographical area and obtain access to the medical care they need on a timely basis.


THE LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. O’MARA
2370 Fifth Ave. San Diego, CA 92101
4200 Latham St. – Ste. B Riverside, CA 92501-1766
1-800-LAW-1199 (1-800-529-1199)
619-583-1199 951-276-1199
www.law1199.com
BOBBITT, PINCKARD & FIELDS, A.P.C.
8388 Vickers St. San Diego, CA 92111
4200 Latham St. – Ste. B Riverside, CA 92501-1766
858-467-1199
www.coplaw.org


NOTICE: Making a false or fraudulent Workers’ Compensation claim is a felony subject to up to 5 years in prison or a fine of up to $50,000 or double the value of the fraud, whichever is greater, or by both imprisonment and fine.

FAILURE TO ADEQUATELY COMPENSATE FORENSIC DOCTORS HAS CAUSED A MAJOR DECREASE IN QMEs AND AMEs


THE LAW OFFICES OF SCOTT A. O’MARA
2370 Fifth Ave. San Diego, CA 92101
4200 Latham St. – Ste. B Riverside, CA 92501-1766
1-800-LAW-1199 (1-800-529-1199)
619-583-1199 951-276-1199
www.law1199.com
BOBBITT, PINCKARD & FIELDS, A.P.C.
8388 Vickers St. San Diego, CA 92111
4200 Latham St. – Ste. B Riverside, CA 92501-1766
858-467-1199
www.coplaw.org


NOTICE: Making a false or fraudulent Workers’ Compensation claim is a felony subject to up to 5 years in prison or a fine of up to $50,000 or double the value of the fraud, whichever is greater, or by both imprisonment and fine.