Myra Jones v. Meramec Group, Inc.

Dependents: N/A

Employer: Meramec Group, Inc.

Additional Party: Second Injury Fund (left open)

Insurer: Self-insured/Cannon Cochran Management Services, Inc.

Hearing Date: October 29, 2008 and November 5, 2008

1. Are any benefits awarded herein? Yes.
2. Was the injury or occupational disease compensable under Chapter 287? Yes.
3. Was there an accident or incident of occupational disease under the Law? Yes.
4. Date of accident or onset of occupational disease: \{Alleged?\} April 25, 2007.
5. State location where accident occurred or occupational disease was contracted: Franklin County, Missouri.
6. Was above employee in employ of above employer at time of alleged accident or occupational disease? Yes.
7. Did employer receive proper notice? Yes.
8. Did accident or occupational disease arise out of and in the course of the employment? Yes.
9. Was claim for compensation filed within time required by Law? Yes.
10. Was employer insured by above insurer? Yes (employer is self-insured c/o Cannon Cochran Management Services, Inc.).
11. Describe work employee was doing and how accident occurred or occupational disease contracted: The claimant used her left hand and thumb in inspecting, weighing, and trimming the soles of shoes.
12. Did accident or occupational disease cause death? No. Date of death? N/A.
13. Part(s) of body injured by accident or occupational disease: Left hand and thumb.

1. Nature and extent of any permanent disability: N/A.
2. Compensation paid to-date for temporary disability: None.
3. Value necessary medical aid paid to date by employer/insurer? $\ 3,243.98.
4. Value necessary medical aid not furnished by employer/insurer? N/A.
5. Employee's average weekly wages: N/A.
6. Weekly compensation rate: N/A.

- Method of wages computation: N/A.

- Amount of compensation payable: N/A.

1. Second Injury Fund liability: Left open.
2. Future medical awarded: Yes, additional medical treatment ordered (see award).

Said payments to begin immediately and to be subject to modification and review as provided by law. This award is only temporary or partial, is subject to further order, and the proceedings are hereby continued and the case kept open until a final award can be made.

IF THIS AWARD IS NOT COMPLIED WITH, THE AMOUNT AWARDED HEREIN MAY BE DOUBLED IN THE FINAL AWARD, IF SUCH FINAL AWARD IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THIS TEMPORARY AWARD.

The claimant's attorney, Mark Moreland, indicates that he is deferring his fee until the final award hearing.

Employee: Myra Jones

Injury No: 07-037873

Before the

DIVISION OF WORKERS'

COMPENSATION

Department of Labor and Industrial Relations of Missouri

Jefferson City, Missouri

On October 29, 2008, the claimant and the employer/insurer appeared for a temporary award hearing. The hearing was continued until November 5, 2008, for the receipt of Employer/insurer's late-filed Exhibit 1. The claimant, Myra Jones, was represented by Mark E. Moreland. The employer/insurer was represented by Michael F. Banahan. Mary Ann Lindsey, also counsel for the employer/insurer, observed the hearing. The Second Injury Fund (SIF) did not participate in the hearing, and issues related to the SIF are deferred until the final award hearing. The claimant testified on her own behalf. Dr. Bruce Schlafly and Dr. David Brown testified by deposition. Theemployer/insurer submitted its brief on November 12, 2008. Counsel for the employee requested, and was granted, several extensions of time to submit a brief; the employee's brief was submitted on December 8, 2008.

The parties stipulated to the following:

- On or about April 25, 2007, the claimant was an employee of Meramec Group, Inc. (the employer).

- The employer was operating subject to the Missouri Workers’ Compensation Law.

- The employer’s liability for workers’ compensation was self-insured, in care of Cannon Cochran Management Services, Inc.

- The Missouri Division of Workers’ Compensation has jurisdiction, and venue in Franklin County is proper.

- A Claim for Compensation was filed within the time prescribed by law.

- The employer has not paid any temporary total disability benefits to the employee.

- The employer paid $\ 3,243.98 in medical aid.

At the hearing, the parties agreed that the issues to be resolved in this proceeding are as follows:

- Whether the claimant sustained an accident or occupational disease that arose out of and in the course of employment.

- Medical causation.

- Whether the claimant's employment was a prevailing factor in her need for additional medical treatment.

- Notice.

On behalf of the claimant, the following exhibits were entered into evidence without objection:

The employer/insurer offered the following exhibits, and they were admitted into the record without objection:

Exhibit 1 Dr. Brown's deposition (late-filed on 11/05/08).

Exhibit 2 Washington County Hospital records.

Note: All marks, handwritten notations, highlighting, or tabs on the exhibits were present at the time the documents were admitted into evidence.

Based on the above exhibits and the testimony presented at the hearing, I make the following findings:

- The claimant is a 55-year-old woman who is right hand dominant.

- The claimant began her employment with Meramec Group, Inc. (the employer), in 1989. She is currently a team leader in the PU molding unit. As a team leader, the claimant weighs shoe soles to check their weight, and inspects the soles for color and trim quality. The heaviest shoe sole she inspects or weighs is 300 grams ( 454 grams equals one pound).

- The claimant works on the first work shift, which runs between 7:00 a.m. and 3:00 p.m. She has a 20-minute lunch break and two 10-minute breaks. During the course of a year, the claimant is usually laid off for a period, often from November to February, or her hours are reduced.

- Every morning, the claimant weighs approximately 96 pairs of shoe soles. During this task, she takes pairs of shoe soles out of boxes and puts the soles on a scale, one at a time, to weigh them.

- The claimant is also responsible for inspecting shoe soles. To perform this task, she takes shoe soles out of a box and turns them all the way around to inspect the color. When inspecting shoe soles, if the claimant notices that the trim on a sole is not correct, she takes the sole and puts it on a trimmer. The trimmer has a round wheel on it. The claimant grips the shoe sole between her thumb and first forefinger, moving the sole across the trimmer in a semi-circle motion. When using the trimmer, the claimant has to put force on the shoe sole to hold it in place and to turn the sole. In an average day, she will re-trim about 50 pairs of soles.

- In addition, the claimant inspects boxes of shoe soles while they are still on the shelves. She pulls pairs of shoe soles out for inspection, looking for color, trim, and weight. She rejects a sole if it is defective and does not meet standards. The claimant usually audits one person a day by going through that worker's boxes. A box contains 18 to 20 pairs of shoe soles. On average, the claimant inspects 20 boxes a day.

- The claimant has problems in her left hand and thumb, including where the base of her thumb meets the hand and wrist. These complaints began around March 2007. Initially, the complaints subsided. By April 2007,

however, her complaints did not go away.

- On April 25, 2007, the claimant told her supervisor, Karen Flowers, that she had hurt her left hand. The claimant completed an Employee Injury Report, and Ms. Flowers completed a Supervisor's Incident Investigation Report. The employer sent the claimant to see Dr. Bobby Enkvetchakul.

- The claimant first saw Dr. Enkvetchakul on April 26, 2007. His diagnosis was left thumb pain. He provided her with a thumb splint and directed her to take Naprosyn, an anti-inflammatory medication. His records note that the pain is probably arthritic in nature but that it was not really clear. A radiology exam report from April 27, 2007, indicates that there are mild arthritic changes throughout the hand. The claimant again saw Dr. Enkvetchakul on May 3, 2007. The diagnosis was still left thumb pain. Dr. Enkvetchakul noted that the Naprosyn was not helping, so he switched her to Indomethacin and ordered a bone scan. Dr. Enkvetchakul's May 11, 2007 records indicate that a Finkelstein's test was equivocal and a Watson test was negative, as was the CMC grind test. He also noted that the results of the bone scan were completely normal. His diagnosis continued to be simply left thumb pain. He directed her to continue wearing the splint, and prescribed a Medrol dose pack.

- On May 18, 2007, the claimant returned for a follow-up visit with Dr. Enkvetchakul. The doctor diagnosed her with left-sided de Quervain's syndrome. He gave her an injection of Lidocain in the first extensor compartment of the wrist. Post-injection examination revealed 100 % relief of her symptoms, so he performed a second injection of Lidocain with 20 mg . of Kenalog into the first dorsal extensor compartment of the wrist. He released her to full duty with no restrictions.

- The claimant again visited Dr. Enkvetchakul on May 30, 2007, due to a recurrence of her left thumb pain. She indicated that the May 18th injection helped for about two or three days, until she started using her hand again. The doctor noted that the Finkelstein's test was positive, but that essentially any type of movement or testing at the wrists produced her pain complaints. He diagnosed her with de Quervain's syndrome, and provided her with a thumb spica splint. He directed her to continue taking Naprosy