How Mediphany Provided Decisive Evidence in a Complex Workers' Compensation Case

Background

A 64-year-old employee at one of the world’s largest apparel companies had previously undergone shoulder surgery due to a work-related injury and had successfully returned to her job. Following her return, she sustained a new shoulder injury while lifting boxes at work. Initially, her claim was accepted as a shoulder strain. However, when an MRI revealed a Type II superior labral tear (SLAP tear) – a finding not previously documented – the employee filed a motion to include this condition as an additional claim in her case.

The Challenge

This new development presented a challenge to the company. The company wanted to make sure their employee was well taken care of, but they also needed to verify if the injury was work-related. This was a newly discovered finding, and the way the injury happened didn’t seem to match with what typically causes a SLAP tear. If approved, the surgical treatment would cost tens of thousands of dollars and mean more time off work for the employee.

“The company wanted to make sure their employee was well taken care of, but they also needed to verify if the injury was work-related.”

The Solution

To help resolve these questions, the company’s attorneys brought in Mediphany to create a detailed video report of the radiology studies. An expert radiologist, specially trained in musculoskeletal imaging, reviewed the scans and created a clear explanation that showed everyone involved what was objectively present. The video report covered three main areas that directly addressed the company’s concerns:

1. Injury identification and explanation:

The video report began with a clear breakdown of the injury, using:

Medical illustrations to show the location and structure of the labrum
Comparisons between the employee’s MRI and a normal shoulder MRI to explain why this finding was described as a SLAP tear
Examples of traumatic SLAP tears, which showed how the features in the employee’s MRI were atypical of a traumatic SLAP tear

2. Determination of the acuity of the injury

Building on this initial analysis, the video report then:

Showed the same finding in side-by-side comparisons with the claimant’s own prior MRIs, allowing the hearing officer and attorneys to see for themselves that it existed before the work injury
Pointed out that the scan showed no signs of a recent injury, such as nearby swelling or joint fluid

3. Expert commentary

To help everyone understand the bigger picture, Mediphany’s subspecialty-trained radiologist:

Presented medical literature showing that SLAP tears become more common as people age
Explained how this supported that the finding was likely a natural process rather than from trauma
Concluded there was no objective evidence that the MRI finding was work-related injury

The Outcome

The clear, objective evidence presented in Mediphany’s video report gave the company’s workers’ compensation department and attorneys the confidence they needed to challenge the claim. By showing what was objectively present in the radiology studies through side-by-side comparisons, expert analysis, and medical literature, the video report provided compelling evidence for their case. This approach not only helped protect the company from an unrelated claim but also potentially saved tens of thousands of dollars.