 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Bucci v. Workers' Compensation Appeal Board8/23/2000
han that of Dr. Bell who attributed Claimant's hearing loss to his exposure to occupational noise. Therefore, the WCJ found that Claimant did not sustain a work-related hearing loss during the course of his employment with Rockwell International. In this regard the following deposition testimony of Dr. Busis is relevant:
[Direct Testimony of Dr. Busis:]
Q. Doctor, you indicated that Mr. Bucci indicated that the noise while working at Rockwell was all around him. Could you indicate . . . whether that is significant in any way?
A. It is particularly significant . . . because this patient has a markedly asymmetric hearing loss. Much more hearing loss on the left. And he certainly wasn't in the situation of work where his left ear was facing noise and his right ear wasn't, he made the point the noise was all around him, so that certainly cannot explain the degree of asymmetry that this man has in his hearing.
Q. Did you have Mr. Bucci undergo an audiologic examination?
A. Yes.
Q. And could you tell us what that examination revealed?
A. He had a markedly asymmetric sensorineural hearing loss, with much poorer hearing on the left than on the right. . . .
There are also dosimeter reading reports, and those are devices used to measure the level of noise exposure for an individual and to determine how much noise a person was exposed to in a workday. And these reports are dated November 18, 1988. . . . Well, most readings are 90 dB or less. . . .the ones that are above only last for several minutes, so based on this report, Mr. Bucci would not have been exposed to enough noise at Rockwell to experience noise-induced hearing loss.
Q. Now, Doctor, . . .when you look at the history you took from Mr. Bucci, your physical exam, when you look at audiologic test results and you reference the documents you've referenced, did you form an opinion as to what did cause Mr. Bucci's hearing loss?
A. First, let me say his audiometric curves are not characteristic of occupational noise-induced hearing loss because of the marked asymmetry and also the degree of hearing loss.
Q. When you say, 'the degree of hearing loss,' could you explain . . .what you mean?
A. Yes. Occupational noise-induced hearing loss in high frequencies usually does not reach a level of more than 75 dB. If we look at Mr. Bucci's audiometric test results, . . .on the left. . .at the higher frequencies,. . .he's just greater than the audiometer can record, so that's out of the question as to whether or not that's noise induced. It just isn't. And on the right,. . .I believe those, too, are beyond the level that we would find due to occupational noise exposure.
Q. Now, Doctor, even had you not reviewed the dosimeter reading reports of November 18, 1988, could you have determined that Mr. Bucci's loss was not an occupational loss even without that report?
A. Yes. In my opinion, even without that report, it would be my opinion that this is not occupational noise induced.
Q. . . .In Mr. Bucci's case, did you take a look at the role of aging at all?
A. Yes. Mr. Bucci's aged 63. I believe part of his hearing loss is due to aging.
Q. Typically you've worked out a percentage of loss. Did you do so in this case?
A. No, I did not, because when we find this degree of asymmetry, I don't think it's fair to apply the formula we use and the standards.
Q. And this asymmetry, Doctor, do you usually see that in cases where there's an occupational-induced hearing loss?
A. Occupational noise-induced hearing loss
Page 1 2 3 Pennsylvania Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|