This is аn appeal from the Workers’ Compensation Commission’s decision finding that appellant failed to prove that her work was the major cause of her disability. On aрpeal, appellant argues that there is no substantial evidence to support the Commission’s decision and that the Commission erred as a matter of law in applying Ark. Code Ann. section 11-9-102(5)(E)(ii) (Supp. 1997). We agree with appellant’s second point and reverse and remand.
Appellant began working for appellee in August of 1995, primarily as a cashier. In December of 1995, appellant began developing numbness in her right hаnd, and she noticed a decrease in her ability to grip. When her symptoms interfered with her sleep, she sought medical attention and was referred to Dr. Ken Carpenter. Dr. Carpenter diagnosed carpal tunnel syndrome. Appellant was referred to оrthopedic surgeon Dr. Larry Mahon, who performed a surgical release on March 28, 1996. Appellee denied compensation, and a hearing was held.
The Commissiоn found that Dr. Mahon’s opinion did not provide any definitive guide to whether the claimant’s work was the major cause of her disability and:
Dr. Mahon can only state that it is compatible with the disability and need for treatment but he cannot state that it is or is not the major cause. Accordingly, we cannot find that Dr. Mahon’s opinion is sufficient to establish the major cause requirement necessary to prove the compensability of her claim. When claimant has failed to submit sufficient evidence to overcome the mаjor cause requirement. . . the claim is not compensable.In our opinion, we should be guided by Dr. Mahons’ educated medical opinion. Dr. Mahon cannot state within a reasonable degree of medical certainty that the claimant’s work accounts for more than fifty percent of her disability or need for treatment. If Dr. Mahon cаnnot render such an opinion, we cannot see there is sufficient evidence in the record to allow us to make such a finding.
Arkansas Code Annotated section ll-9-102(5)(E)(ii) prоvides that the burden of proof for injuries falling within the definition of compensable injury that аre not caused by a specific incident or are not identifiable by time and place of occurrence, such as carpal tunnel syndrome, shall be by a preponderance of the evidence, and the resultant condition is compensable only if the alleged compensable injury is the major cause of the disability оr need for treatment. Thus, in the present case, appellee had the burden оf proving by a preponderance of the evidence that her carpal tunnel syndrome injury was the major cause of the disability or need for treatment. Tyson Foods, Inc. v. Griffin,
Reversed and remanded.