Marilynn Vandever vs. Homebound Medical

BEFORE THE ARKANSAS WORKERS' COMPENSATION COMMISSION CLAIM NO. H404478 MARILYNN G. VANDEVER, EMPLOYEE CLAIMANT HOMEBOUND MEDICAL, EMPLOYER RESPONDENT SUMMIT CONSULTING LLC, INSURANCE CARRIER/TPA RESPONDENT OPINION FILED NOVEMBER 17, 2025 Upon review before the FULL COMMISSION in Little Rock, Pulaski County, Arkansas. Claimant represented by the HONORABLE EVELYN E. BROOKS, Attorney at Law, Fayetteville, Arkansas. Respondents represented by the HONORABLE ZACHARY F. RYBURN, Attorney at Law, Little Rock, Arkansas. Decision of Administrative Law Judge: Affirmed. OPINION AND ORDER The claimant appeals an administrative law judge’s opinion filed June 26, 2025. The administrative law judge found that the claimant failed to prove she sustained a compensable injury. After reviewing the entire record de novo, the Full Commission finds that the claimant did not establish a compensable injury by medical evidence supported by objective findings. I. HISTORY Marilynn Gail Vandever, now age 71, testified that she became employed with the respondents, Homebound Medical, in September 2023.

VANDEVER - H404478 2 The claimant testified that she was hired by the respondents “to take care of a little girl. I am a private-duty nurse.” The parties stipulated that an employment relationship existed on or about June 12, 2024. The claimant testified on direct examination: Q. And so on June 12 th of 2024, were you working for Homebound taking care of this girl? A. Yes.... Q. And how old was she? A. Five. Q. And how much did she weigh? A. She weighed between 50, 55, max.... Q. So what happened on June 12 th of 2024? A. That morning, she was ready to get up, so I went and got everything together. Got her dressed in the bed like I always do and I went to lift her out of bed. I always lift – I teach lifting so people don’t get hurt, but when I turned her – I picked her up and then I tried to turn my body around but I couldn’t turn it around because something was impairing my feet and I don’t know what it is to this day. So instead of turning my entire body, taking those steps, I had to twist my upper torso and get her on the bed before I dropped her. Q. And as you were doing that, what did you experience? A. Well, I got a really bad sharp pain in my lower back and my buttocks and I had to lay over the bed until it released or got better. And then I continued to push her down the bed, you know, scoot her down the bed to get her up and did her breathing treatments and everything, and then we both just sat down and rested. Q. Okay. And did you report that injury? A. I did that night. I wrote a note and sent it to them by e-mail that I needed to make a report, but I didn’t really want to make a workers’ comp report, but I wanted it on record in case I didn’t get better.

VANDEVER - H404478 3 According to the record, the claimant sent an e-mail to Brooke Buchanan, the respondent-employer’s Care Coordinator, at 10:11 p.m. on June 12, 2024: Hello Brooke I don’t know who to call or where to find an incident report form. I got hurt at work today and need to at least make a record of it. Please call me or email me a form. Just know I didn’t realize I was hurt, I thought it was a strained muscle, after I got home and sat down to rest I had to have help getting up. And it’s not getting any easier. Regretfully, Marilynn Vandever The claimant wrote a “To Whom this Concerns” note on June 13, 2024: On 6/12/2024, I was transferring Avarie from her bed to her parents’ bed, so I could get her into her wheelchair. I somehow got in a bind with my feet and instead of being able to turn and sit her on the bed, I had to twist my upper body and sit her down. I (sic) the process, the pain in my lower back was excruciating and shooting into my right and left buttocks. But there was no way I could turn and put her back into her bed, so I endured the pain and put her on her parents’ bed. I rested for a few minutes and went on to put her into her wheelchair. I really thought I had just aggravated a muscle, so I continued with my morning care and then rested my back. I felt a twinge in my back and buttock throughout the shift, but I really thought it would eventually stop. I finished my shift and went to get into my car, but it was difficult for me to lift my left leg to put it in my car without burning pain in my left lower back radiating down my buttocks and the back of my thigh. I came home (a 4-minute drive) and sat down with my feet up to rest. After about an hour and a half I went to get up and had to have help. I took some ibuprofen and went to bed early. At 0530 this morning I had to call my husband to help me up. At this point, I called on-

VANDEVER - H404478 4 call and advised her that I could not go in today. I also told her that I notified Brooke last night about my injury via e-mail. Raychel Miller, an Administrative Assistant with HomeBound Home Health, e-mailed the claimant at 10:24 a.m. on June 13, 2024: “Please print and fill out the attached form. We will need this returned ASAP.” The claimant sent an e-mail to an individual named “Gayla” at 11:55 a.m. on June 13, 2024: I sent an injury report this morning and I think it was misunderstood. I got a message from workers comp and i was surprise (sic), as I didn’t mean I wanted to file a claim. I appreciate the concern, but I am sure I just have a pulled muscle. I don’t want to file a claim I just needed to let y’all know I couldn’t work today and why. Please retract the report to Summit because I don’t need medical attention. I am off until next Friday, so between now and then I am sure I’ll be back to normal. I’m sorry for the misunderstanding. Thank you for your concern. The claimant then e-mailed Raychel Miller at 11:57 a.m. on June 13, 2024: “Please talk to Gayla. I am not, nor do I need to file a workers compensation claim.” The claimant’s testimony indicated that she eventually filed a workers’ compensation claim, and that the respondents authorized medical treatment. An x-ray of the claimant’s pelvis was taken on September 12, 2024: “Pain in left hip ... WC twisted back while lifting a patient pain left side.” The impression was “No acute osseous abnormality.”

VANDEVER - H404478 5 An x-ray of the claimant’s lumbosacral spine was taken on November 7, 2024 with the following findings: Two-view lumbar spine demonstrates mild degenerative disc disease. Atherosclerotic calcification of the abdominal aorta. Mild facet joint arthropathy of the lower lumbar spine. No compression fracture. IMPRESSION: MILD DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE AND FACET JOINT ARTHROPATHY OF THE LUMBAR SPINE. NO ACUTE FINDINGS. The claimant began treating at West Washington County Clinic on December 19, 2024: Ms. Vandever is a 70yo F presenting today for low back pain with radiculopathy to the LLE. She notes pain since 6/12/24 when she was lifting a patient who weighed approx. 50lbs and she twisted and she felt immediate pain. The pain radiates to the left buttock and the (sic) down to the posterior thigh....No hx of lumbar sx.... Thoracic Spine examination demonstrates no spine tenderness on palpation. Lumbar/Sacral Spine examination demonstrates Lumbosacral Spine: Tenderness: left sciatic notch, but not the lumbar spine, not the left paraspinal, not the right paraspinal and not the right sciatic notch. +TTP L SI Joint.... Motor tone: the muscle tone was normal. Involuntary movements: no involuntary movements were seen. Dr. Jennifer Cheatham’s impression was “1. Low back pain radiating to left lower extremity,” “2. Cervicalgia,” “3. Hyperreflexia,” and “4. Sacroiliac joint pain....Will refer to physical therapy for lumbar spine and SI joint. Will order a lumbar MRI to further evaluate this. She will continue to follow with pain management.”

VANDEVER - H404478 6 An MRI of the claimant’s lumbar spine was taken on December 30, 2024 with the following findings: The vertebral bodies of the lumbar spine maintain normal height and alignment. No fracture seen. There is normal marrow signal. The conus medullaris terminates at L1-2 and is normal in signal and morphology. There is no acute paraspinal abnormality seen. At L1-2, no abnormality. At L2-3, mild loss of disc height and disc desiccation is seen. There is mild annular disc bulging. There is thickening of the ligamentum flavum. No significant neural foraminal narrowing or central canal stenosis. At L3-4, disc desiccation is demonstrated with annular disc bulge. There is left foraminal disc fissuring. No central canal stenosis or neural foraminal narrowing. Mild bilateral facet osteoarthritis. At L4-5, there is mild posterior disc bulge. There is mild thickening of ligamentum flavum and mild facet hypertrophy and osteoarthritis. There is no significant central canal stenosis seen. There is mild left neural foraminal narrowing. At L5-S1, no disc herniation. No central canal stenosis or significant neural foraminal narrowing. IMPRESSION: 1. MILD LUMBAR SPONDYLOSIS WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF HIGH-GRADE CENTRAL CANAL STENOSIS OR FORAMINAL NARROWING. The claimant began a program of physical therapy visits on January 2, 2025: “Patient reports she was lifting and transferring a patient to the left. She states she has a protective pattern to prevent injury of lifting and then pivoting feet instead of twisting her back. She reports on day of incident her feet some how were caught and she had to turn her trunk to transfer the patient and protect the patient. However, as she did this she

VANDEVER - H404478 7 had instant pain in the low back and left hip....She reports the pain has progressed since.” The claimant underwent a Sacroiliac Joint injection on February 17, 2025. A pre-hearing order was filed on February 24, 2025. According to the text of the pre-hearing order, the claimant contended, “The Claimant contends that she suffered a her (sic) low back while working and is entitled to medical treatment and Temporary Total Disability from her date last worked to a day yet to be determined. The Claimant reserves all other issues.” The respondents contended, “The Respondents contend that this claim is denied. There are no objective findings to substantiate the alleged injury. The Claimant was not injured at work. If compensable, the claimant refused a light duty job offer and is not entitled to TTD beyond the date of the offer.” The parties agreed to litigate the following issues: 1. Compensability of an injury to the low back. 2. Medical treatment in regard to the low back injury. 3. Temporary Total Disability benefits from June 12, 2024, to a date to be determined. 4. Attorney Fees. 5. All other issues are reserved.

VANDEVER - H404478 8 Meanwhile, the claimant was discharged from physical therapy on April 23, 2025. The claimant testified that she benefitted from physical therapy and an injection. After a hearing, an administrative law judge filed an opinion on June 26, 2025. The administrative law judge found that the claimant failed to prove she sustained a compensable injury. The claimant appeals to the Full Commission. II. ADJUDICATION Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-102(4)(Repl. 2012) provides, in pertinent part: (A) “Compensable injury” means: (i) An accidental injury causing internal or external physical harm to the body ... arising out of and in the course of employment and which requires medical services or results in disability or death. An injury is “accidental” only if it is caused by a specific incident and is identifiable by time and place of occurrence[.] A compensable injury must be established by medical evidence supported by objective findings. Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-102(4)(D)(Repl. 2012). “Objective findings” are those findings which cannot come under the voluntary control of the patient. Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-102(16)(A)(i)(Repl. 2012). The requirement that a compensable injury be established by medical evidence supported by objective findings applies only to the existence and extent of the injury. Ford v. Chemipulp Process, Inc., 63 Ark.

VANDEVER - H404478 9 App. 260, 977 S.W.2d 5 (1998), citing Stephens Truck Lines v. Millican, 58 Ark. App. 275, 950 S.W.2d 472 (1997). The employee has the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that she sustained a compensable injury. Ark. Code Ann. §11-9- 102(4)(E)(i)(Repl. 2012). Preponderance of the evidence means the evidence having greater weight or convincing force. Metropolitan Nat’l Bank v. La Sher Oil Co., 81 Ark. App. 269, 101 S.W.3d 252 (2003). An administrative law judge found in the present matter, “2. Claimant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that she suffered a compensable low back injury on June 13, 2024.” The Full Commission finds that the claimant did not establish a compensable injury by medical evidence supported by objective findings. The claimant testified that she became employed as a private-duty nurse for the respondents in September 2023. The parties stipulated that the employment relationship existed on or about June 12, 2024. The claimant testified that she was providing home health care for a five-year- old girl that day. The claimant testified that she felt a “sharp pain” in her lower back while lifting the patient out of bed. The record indicates that the claimant e-mailed the respondent-employer’s Care Coordinator on June 12, 2024 and notified her that an alleged specific incident had occurred. After she was asked to complete a form, the claimant informed two

VANDEVER - H404478 10 representatives of the respondents in part, “I didn’t mean I wanted to file a claim....I am not, nor do I need to file a workers compensation claim.” In any event, the claimant’s testimony indicated that she eventually filed a claim, and the claimant’s testimony indicated that the respondents authorized medical treatment. The claimant did not establish a compensable injury by medical evidence supported by objective findings. An x-ray of the claimant’s pelvis on November 7, 2024 showed “No acute osseous abnormality.” An x-ray of the claimant’s lumbosacral spine on November 7, 2024 showed “MILD DEGENERATIVE DISC DISEASE AND FACET JOINT ARTHROPATHY OF THE LUMBAR SPINE. NO ACUTE FINDINGS.” The results of the x- rays taken November 7, 2024 cannot be interpreted as objective medical findings establishing a compensable injury. The claimant treated at West Washington County Clinic on December 19, 2024, where a physical examination showed “Tenderness: left sciatic notch, but not the lumbar spine[.]” “Tenderness” is not an objective medical finding establishing a compensable injury. Rodriguez v. M. McDaniel Co., Inc., 98 Ark. App. 138, 252 S.W.2d 146 (2007). It is well-settled that a report of “muscle spasms” can constitute objective medical findings. Continental Express, Inc. v. Freeman, 339 Ark. 142, 4 S.W.3d 124 (1999). In the present matter, that are no reports or

VANDEVER - H404478 11 observations in the record of “muscle spasm” based on a physical examination of the claimant’s low back or lumbar spine. We specifically note the report at West Washington County Clinic on December 19, 2024, “Motor tone: the muscle tone was normal. Involuntary movements: no involuntary movements were seen.” An MRI of the claimant’s lumbar spine on December 30, 2024 showed “1. MILD LUMBAR SPONDYLOSIS WITHOUT EVIDENCE OF HIGH-GRADE CENTRAL CANAL STENOSIS OR FORAMINAL NARROWING.” This impression from the MRI of the claimant’s lumbar spine cannot be interpreted as medical evidence establishing a compensable injury. After reviewing the entire record de novo, the Full Commission finds that the claimant did not establish a compensable injury by medical evidence supported by objective findings, in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. §11-9-102(4)(D)(Repl. 2012). We therefore affirm the administrative law judge’s finding that the claimant did not prove she sustained a compensable injury. This claim is respectfully denied and dismissed. IT IS SO ORDERED. ___________________________________ SCOTTY DALE DOUTHIT, Chairman ___________________________________ M. SCOTT WILLHITE, Commissioner ___________________________________ MICHAEL R. MAYTON, Commissioner