I am writing this letter in regards to the new IMR process that was enacted with SB 863. I am a represented injured worker who has deep concerns about how I will be able to get medical records to the IMR.
This is my situation. My primary treating physician’s office charges me $35. to get my report. Since I cannot be copied on these reports I have no idea when they are actually written or sent to utilization review. I have a secondary doctor who is a pain management doctor, and their office policy is not to give reports to the injured worker. Again, I have no idea after my exam when the report will be transcribed or sent to utilization review. Both doctor’s offices cannot “cc” me on my reports, as I have requested. My attorney is very busy as well, so getting reports sent to me can be challenging. I do not have a complete file of my records. I would think most represented injured workers do not have copies of all their medical reports and testing's.
With the new IMR process there are strict deadlines for sending the request for IMR and the records accompanying them. I am aware that the requesting doctor, injured worker, applicant attorney and claims adjuster can send records. The temporary guidelines do state the claims adjuster must send the past 6 months of records. A study of the IMR reviews has shown that some claims adjusters are in fact not sending the records. This was reviewed by a judge who did not overturn those IMR denials even after it was found records were not sent. The claims adjuster also did not receive a fine for not sending the records. HOW could that happen as fines were listed against claims adjusters who do not send records to the IMR doctor? Now claims adjusters know they will not be penalized for not sending relevant records to the IMR, or any records. You now have a fox in the henhouse situation, with patient’s health at stake.
This is my question and concern. How is it a fair system for injured workers who are represented and do not have access to their medical records and/or do not receive them timely? I have heard of some applicant attorneys who are sending the records, however many are too busy. There is no such rule that state’s they have to. They also do not get paid to do so. I have discussed this with other injured workers and they are in the SAME situation as I am. Can the system be fair if we do not have access to our records if the claims adjuster does not have to follow the rules and send the records.
I am also concerned at the amount of records the guidelines state have to be sent. I have read it was one year, and then I read it was six months. For many injured workers, they have important testing’s that should be sent, that go beyond that date. For a spinal injury for example, we do not get MRI’s every six months, and sometimes past a year. For injured workers who have secondary conditions such as urological and testing’s such as urodynamic and cystoscopy may only be done once in a claim. That is not something can or should be done yearly. If that injured worker had those tests two years prior, which showed significant damage, the claims adjuster does not have to send them per the temporary rules. How would that IMR review be fair to the injured worker who desperately needed surgery to restore bladder function, but those records were not sent?
There is another problem with this new process that no one seems to be addressing. Many times the claims adjuster does not send the doctor’s request to UR in the first place. What does an injured worker do in that situation. He cannot even request an IMR until there is a UR denial. I am asking this as many of my doctor’s requests are not sent by my adjuster to UR, and not approved by her either. I have talked to other injured workers and this happens all the time to them too. One recently had their doctor request spinal surgery. The adjuster did not send it to UR, and did not approve it. I know very well that applicant attorneys are supposed to take non-compliant requests that were not sent to UR to an expedited hearing. From my own personal experience, and talking to many other injured workers that does not happen. Applicant Attorney’s cannot take all non-compliant UR issues to court. They do not have the time. I have had three attorneys and have not had one take that issue to court. I did not see any new penalties in SB 863 that addresses what happens when the claims adjuster refuses to send something to UR. If they do not change it to pre-SB 899 where applicant attorneys could get paid for taking these issues to court, I do not see this changing. If we expect them to work for peanuts and take all of these non compliant UR issues to court, they would soon go out of business.
I am also writing this for the countless injured workers who are not aware of their rights or the new IMR laws. I am aware that injured workers will receive notification of their rights to request an IMR after they receive a UR denial. I believe MOST injured workers in California are not aware of SB 863 and the complicated IMR process. Yes, it is one the state’s web-page however many injured workers either do not have access to that or even aware where that site is. I think the state should send out a booklet about the IMR process to all California injured workers giving a detailed explanation of how to request an IMR, their rights to send medical records and how to get access to their medical records. If they are not holding claims adjusters accountable for not sending records, they need to find a way to copy reports to represented injured workers, and send them a copy of past records.
The bottom line is an injured worker who is not represented will have to be copied on their doctor’s reports and testing’s and if they are aware of how the new IMR program works with being able to also submit records to the IMR reviewer they can defend them self’s since the claims adjuster will not always send the requested records for a proper IMR review. An injured worker who is represented has a hard time obtaining their medical records and when some claims adjusters are not following the law by sending the records (even after the IMR reviewing doctor had ask for them) there is little chance of getting the proper medical treatment authorized with a 65% denial rate going on with the IMR.
If the State of California is going to also ask the injured worker to send records as well as the adjusters for the new IMR then all injured workers should by law also be copied as well as the adjusters and attorneys for the system to be fair and not one sided for the insurance companies.