Record Reviews

Record reviews involve a comprehensive analysis of medical records and summary reports. These reviews are performed by a professional with expertise in a claimant’s condition and are utilized to identify questions that need to be addressed, additional information that needs to be obtained, or as a means of highlighting specific challenges (i.e., non-compliance with treatment, co-morbid conditions, secondary gain factors) that need to be clarified during an IME. In some cases, a comprehensive peer review may serve to synthesize issues in complex cases where multiple assessments have taken place, treatment providers are involved, and/or co-morbid conditions exist. On occasion, record reviews may be sufficient and serve to avoid the high costs of an IME.

Peer-to-Peer Consultations

A peer-to-peer consultation involves a productive dialog with a claimant’s treatment provider. These consultations are often performed in conjunction with a record review.  The goal is to establish a reciprocal discussion to better understand a claimant’s neuropsychological or psychological issues, ongoing symptoms, response to treatment, current functional status, potential impediments to treatment/recovery, motivational issues, and other influential factors.  A properly conducted peer-to-peer consultation may serve to expedite a satisfactory solution in complex and/or intractable cases.   

Peer-to-peer consultations also involve collegial discussion with a treatment provider following an IME in order to discuss findings of an independent evaluation, engage in a discourse regarding a claimant’s status toward Maximum Medical Improvement (MMI), and/or to facilitate a smooth transition back to occupational functioning.

Dr. Luis has over a decade of experience completing professional record reviews and peer-to-peer consultations for disability claims, worker’s compensation claims, and, on occasion, personal injury claims.  Her expertise involves record reviews and peer-to-peer consultations of cases entailing neuropsychological or psychological issues.  The process often includes reviewing neuropsychological/psychological evaluation reports, raw test data, interpretive strategies performed by colleagues, and evaluating the therapeutic process and techniques used by treatment providers.