Call or email us anytime
(805) 484-0333
Search Guide
Today is Tuesday, April 16, 2024 -

Industry Insights

Uribarri: DWC Issues New QME Regs

  • State: California

The Division of Workers’ Compensation has issued revised PQME regulations that permanently incorporate some of the pandemic-era rules allowing for remote evaluations and longer scheduling time frames.

Zane P. Uribarri

Zane P. Uribarri

The regulations, which were posted on Feb. 2, can be found here. While we know our readers just love to comb through regulatory legalese, let’s go ahead and break down these recent changes and the impacts on medical-legal evaluations anyway.

COVID rules become permanent

The most striking change in the new regulations is the permanent adoption of the remote evaluation rules that began nearly three years ago during COVID.

New Rule 46.3 was an emergency rule but now provides for “a remote health evaluation” where the medical-legal evaluator can “see and hear each other” but are not in the same location. The regulation allows for videoconferencing or teleconferencing technology to be used but specifies that there must be a video and audio connection and that the doctor must be able to conduct the evaluation with the same standard of care as an in-person evaluation.

The regulation specifies that this method may be used only when a “hands-on physical evaluation is not necessary” and the following four conditions are met:

  • The issue to be addressed is AOE/COE, termination of benefit payments or to address a dispute regarding work restrictions.
  • Written agreement to the remote evaluation by the injured worker, the PQME and either the carrier or the employer.
  • A remote evaluation is appropriate and ethical under both the accepted medical practices and the fifth edition of the AMA Guides.
  • The PQME states that an in-person physical exam is not necessary.

In many instances, the panel-qualified medical evaluator may not be able to conduct a remote evaluation based on the above criteria. For example, range of motion for the shoulders under Chapter 16.4 requires careful measurements of flexion, extension, abduction and adduction, not to mention internal and external rotation. The act of taking these measurements alone would seem to require trained medical personnel to be present not only to ensure that full effort is being made but also to take accurate measurements.

Arguably, any internal complaint is affected to some degree by an individual’s blood pressure, which would also require an in-person evaluation for accurate measurements to be taken.

The old emergency regulation allowed for a remote evaluation if the applicant had to travel outside his immediate household. The new regulation's first subsection states that the evaluator may conduct a remote evaluation if the issue to be addressed is AOE/COE, termination of benefit payments or to address a dispute regarding work restrictions.

However, if the claim is accepted and the applicant has not reached a permanent and stationary status, it appears that agreeing to a remote evaluation is not possible. One way to address these limits would be to always ask the evaluator to comment on work restrictions and whether the applicant can return to work, and this brings the issue under the umbrella of the new regulations.

What to do if you prefer in-person evaluation

There are many times when the defense wants a PQME evaluation to take place in person, where the physician can not only interact with the applicant but can also get a better sense of the applicant’s level of truthfulness.

Since a written agreement for a remote evaluation must be signed off by the carrier or employer, then simply not agreeing to the remote evaluation will take the case out of this new section, and an in-person evaluation will be needed. As a practice tip, I would always document why there is an objection to the remote evaluation and list the reasons to justify withholding consent.

Deadline changes

The remaining regulatory changes to 8 CCR 31 and 8 CCR 34 increase the length of time for exam scheduling. Initial and reevaluations under ML 201 and ML 202 can now be set within 90 days of the appointment request, and the party with the legal right to set the evaluation may extend that time to 120 days. The parties jointly may waive the 120-day limit.

The parties may also agree to allow the initial evaluation to take place at any office the PQME has on file with the medical director, and subsequent reevaluations may be done at offices within a reasonable distance from the applicant’s residence. If an evaluation is canceled by the PQME, it must be rescheduled within 60 days, under the new rules.


The additional 30 days added to the deadlines will likely cause PQME evaluations and reports to issue later than before.

While remote evaluations may be more convenient, they must occur only when appropriate to ensure accurate results.

Zane P. Uribarri is a partner at the Law Offices of Bradford & Barthel’s Ontario office. This entry from Bradford & Barthel's blog appears with permission.

No Comments

Log in to post a comment


Do not post libelous remarks. You are solely responsible for the postings you input. By posting here you agree to hold harmless and indemnify WorkCompCentral for any damages and actions your post may cause.


Upcoming Events

  • May 5-8, 2024

    Risk World

    Amplify Your Impact Theres no limit to what you can achieve when you join the global risk managem …

  • May 13-15, 2024

    NCCI's Annual Insights Symposi

    Join us May 1315, 2024, for NCCI's Annual Insights Symposium (AIS) 2024, the industrys premier e …

  • May 13-14, 2024

    CSIA Announces the 2024 Annual

    The Board of Managers is excited to announce that the CSIA 2024 Annual Meeting and Educational Con …

Workers' Compensation Events

Social Media Links

c/o Business Insurance Holdings, Inc.
PO Box 1010
Greenwich, CT 06836
(805) 484-0333