Garcia-Solis v. Farmers Ins. Co.

Under ORS 656.245(1), “[d]iagnostic services can only be compensable if they are required for a determination or severity of an already accepted compensable injury, but “diagnostic services for the purpose of establishing the compensability of a new or consequential condition are not compensable.” Counts v. International Paper Co., 146 Or App 268, 271 (1997).

Claimant sought review of an order of the Worker’s Compensation Board (the Board) which upheld Employer’s refusal to authorize a consultation with a phycologist in order to address Claimant’s symptom’s related to Post Traumatic Stress Disorder (PTSD). Claimant assigned error to the Board’s determination that “PTSD is not an accepted condition.” On appeal, Claimant argued that her consultation should be compensable because her consultation was related to her work injury. Under ORS 656.245(1), “[d]iagnostic services can only be compensable if they are required for a determination or severity of an already accepted compensable injury, but “diagnostic services for the purpose of establishing the compensability of a new or consequential condition are not compensable.” Counts v. International Paper Co., 146 Or App 268, 271 (1997). The Court of Appeals held that the claimant was seeking diagnostic services for the purpose of establishing the compensability of PTSD. Affirmed.