specific traumatic incident. Employee testified he filed a claim for compensation because he thought his body had just given out.
The Missouri Workers' Compensation Law provides for compensation for injuries that result from workplace accidents or occupational disease. Section 287.020.2 RSMo defines an "accident", as follows:
The word "accident" as used in this chapter shall mean an unexpected traumatic event or unusual strain identifiable by time and place of occurrence and producing at the time objective symptoms of an injury caused by a specific event during a single work shift. An injury is not compensable because work was a triggering or precipitating factor.
Given the foregoing definition, it is apparent that employee did not sustain an accident on April 28, 2008. Employee alleges that his body "gave out," but we find that this does not amount to objective symptoms of an injury caused by a specific event, because employee fails to identify any unexpected traumatic event or unusual strain. Rather, he alleges that, while trying to move a piece of equipment, he experienced the realization or feeling that he would be unable to do such work. According to employee's testimony, the significance of April 28, 2008, is that he came to understand on that day that his physical condition was worse than he had believed. A subjective realization or feeling that one's physical condition is worse than previously believed does not fairly come within the terms of the statute set forth above. We conclude, therefore, that employee did not sustain a compensable primary injury by accident.
The question remains whether employee sustained a compensable injury by occupational disease. Section 287.067.2 RSMo provides, as follows:
An injury by occupational disease is compensable only if the occupational exposure was the prevailing factor in causing both the resulting medical condition and disability. The "prevailing factor" is defined to be the primary factor, in relation to any other factor, causing both the resulting medical condition and disability. Ordinary, gradual deterioration, or progressive degeneration of the body caused by aging or by the normal activities of day-to-day living shall not be compensable.
There is no expert medical testimony on this record that would suggest any occupational exposure was the prevailing factor causing employee to sustain an injury as of April 2008. Dr. Poetz, employee's expert, did not identify any occupational exposure, nor did he suggest employee's work caused him to sustain a gradual onset or repetitive motion injury. Rather, Dr. Poetz agreed that he believed an "incident" occurred on April 28, 2008. We note that, in his report, Dr. Poetz assigned a 15\% permanent partial disability to the body as a whole as measured at the lumbar spine "directly resultant from the April 28, 2008 work related injury." We also note that, in his testimony, Dr. Poetz essentially admitted that he either couldn't remember or didn't know what was alleged to have occurred on April 28, 2008. In response to a question by employer's counsel which suggested employee alleged a "popping" injury in his thoracic spine on that date, Dr. Poetz testified he thought that was the July 2007 event.