Landis v. Liberty Northwest Insurance Corp.

The majority concludes that the director did not err in determining that a TENS unit is not a prosthetic as defined in OAR 436-009-0080 (2010) and in accordance *649with ORS 656.245(l)(c)(D). I respectfully dissent. I would conclude that the TENS unit is a compensable prosthetic device.

The majority correctly states the undisputed facts. I briefly summarize the facts pertinent to my dissent. Claimant suffered a compensable injury and, at some point, was prescribed a TENS unit for back pain. Claimant later sought treatment from Dr. McKellar and he prescribed the continued use of the TENS unit.…