Decision No.: 2021-0334
Page 24
[46.3]
In his report of February 12, 1991, a specialist in anesthesia and pain
relief noted he had previously examined the worker and the worker
complained of chronic pain then. While the worker’s fractures had healed
the worker continued to have severe pain (burning pain with sharp,
shooting, lancinating pain pain) that was worse on the right side. The
physician noted wasting of muscles, hypersensitivity to light touch with the
skin showing signs of allodynia and hyperesthesia. He diagnosed reflex
sympathetic dystrophy secondary to multiple trauma of both forearms. He
opined, “there is no doubt that she is in no condition to continue to work in
any capacity whether it be full-time or event part-time.” He also noted that
the worker found it impossible to perform domestic chores for more than 1
to 2 hours after which she needed to rest. He further opined that since
any kind of work would entail the use of both hands, he did “not envisage
her being able to take on any active employment whether modified or not,
at present.” This report was sent to the WCB on February 13, 1991.
[46.4]
On May 29, 1991, an orthopedic surgeon’s consultation report noted
“demonstrable weakness of all of the functions in the [right] forearm and
wrist”. The physician concluded the worker’s “main problem” appeared to
be pain that was aggravated through usage. However, because there was
a lack of temperature change and skin change, he did not think the
worker’s symptoms represented true reflex sympathetic dystrophy. He
stated, “nevertheless, there is obviously pain persisting here, whatever the
cause, and this seems to be the factor limiting her ability to work.” He also
noted the worker’s pain seemed to be “out of all proportion to what one
would expect from this type of injury particularly with a delayed onset.”
The physician concluded that the worker’s pain was “causing her total
impairment” and it may be classified as a form of Somatic Pain Disorder
that would “hopefully . . . improve.” He considered the worker unfit for
work not because of her restriction in power and mobility but rather
because of her “chronic pain disorder.”
[46.5]
[46.6]
On April 8, 1992, the worker’s treating physician opined it was “very
unlikely” that the worker would be able to resume any kind of work. She
was receiving no active therapy and required constant pain relief.
On July 8, 1992, the worker’s consulting orthopedic surgeon relayed that
the worker “resorts to analgesia when she finds the pain intolerable.” The
orthopedic surgeon wrote, “I am not inclined to alter my opinion that this
patient will not be able to return to any form of productive work as a result
of the injury she sustained.”
[46.7]
On February 22, 1993, the worker was examined by a plastic surgeon who
had previously examined the worker at the time of injury. Of her right wrist
injury, he wrote that the worker’s “right hand has regressed further from
when last seen in 1986.” He noted she had persistent pain with atrophy of
the tissues and pain on movement with instability to move the digits
Classification: Protected A