The claimant argued that her injuries fell outside the MIG and sought medical benefits and the costs of examinations. Adjudicator Lake held that the claimant’s injuries fell within the MIG. The adjudicator concluded that there was insufficient documentary evidence, supporting reasons, or analysis to establish that the claimant had cervical radiculopathy. The claimant relied on a report that stated there was some suggestion of a cervical radiculopathy down the claimant’s right side. However, a Nerve Conduction Test was not conducted, which would have been strong evidence of cervical radiculopathy. Adjudicator Lake also noted that a Spurling’s Test was not conducted, which would have also been strong evidence. With regard to chronic pain, the claimant was not diagnosed with chronic pain syndrome, and could not demonstrate that her pain was ongoing or that she was experiencing any functional impairment.
Menu