WCAT Decision Number:
A2102306 (July 25, 2022)
response to Dr. Galbraith’s opinion, Dr. S1 did not address this point. I am satisfied that the
reason for the MRI was not, as was submitted by the workers’ adviser, to investigate the
symptoms the worker reported on March 10, 2020. Nor was it ordered because Dr. S1 believed
the worker may have sustained an acute neck injury. Rather, it was ordered to investigate the
symptoms the worker reported on March 9, 2020, which did not include symptoms in her neck.
[107] I acknowledge that, commencing on December 20, 2020, Dr. S1 has expressed the opinion that
the worker sustained a soft tissue or “whiplash” injury on February 17, 2020. However,
notwithstanding that he was provided with an opportunity to respond to Dr. Galbraith’s
observation that there were no documented objective findings supporting that the worker had
sustained an acute soft tissue injury, Dr. S1 did not provide evidence of any such findings. I
accept that, since being advised by the worker on December 20, 2020 that she had reported to
him on March 10, 2020 that she sustained a whiplash injury to her neck at work on February 17,
2020, Dr. S1 has accepted that this report was made. However, I find it unlikely that Dr. S1’s
recollection is accurate. First, as noted above, it is the worker’s sworn evidence that she was
able to recall the date of injury only with the benefit of hindsight in April or May 2020, long after
the March 10, 2020 consultation. Also, Dr. S1’s recollection of why he did not record the
worker’s report of injury is very different than the reason the worker provided. Rather than
stating that he did not record a work injury because the worker asked him not to do so, he
attributed the omission to the fact that, as is often the case, he has trouble following the
worker’s story. It is apparent that Dr. S1’s current firm belief that the worker sustained a
whiplash injury on February 17, 2020 is not based on a direct recollection of the worker having
told him on March 10, 2020 that she did so but, instead, is based on the fact that, since initially
advising him on December 20, 2021 (two days after the initial denial of her claim) that she did
report this injury, the worker has consistently told him the same story.
[108] In addition, I acknowledge that, in her submissions, the workers’ adviser pointed out that Dr. M’s
January 6, 2021 report indicates that the worker sustained a whiplash injury as a result of the
February 17, 2020 workplace incident. However, the January 6, 2021 report (which is the first
report to the Board in which both a February 17, 2020 injury and the mechanism of injury is
mentioned) was based solely on the worker’s self-report. There is no indication Dr. M had ever
seen the worker before and, as he practices in a different clinic that Dr. S1 and the worker’s
other healthcare providers, he would not have had access to the worker’s documented prior
medical history at the time he completed the report. More importantly, the report does not
include any clinical findings to support the presence of the identified whiplash injury.
[109] Finally, I acknowledge the submission by the workers’ adviser that, because of the COVID-19
pandemic, the worker’s ability to get a diagnosis and to seek medical treatment was affected.
However, the evidence does not support this submission. Within the several months following
February 2020, the worker participated in telephone or in-person consultations with Dr. S1 on
March 9, 10, 20, and 25 and May 21, 2020, was able to undergo very timely imaging for
investigation of the concerns in her arms (March 18, 2020 MRI), saw her chiropractor on
32
150, 4600 Jacombs Road, Richmond, B.C. V6V 3B1
Tel: (604) 664-7800 | 1-800-663-2782
Fax: (604) 664-7898 | wcat.bc.ca