§386-79 Medical examination by employer's physician. (a) After an injury and during the period of disability, the employee, whenever ordered by the director of labor and industrial relations, shall submit to examination, at reasonable times and places, by a duly qualified physician or surgeon designated and paid by the employer. The employee shall have the right to have a physician, surgeon, or chaperone designated and paid by the employee present at the examination, which right, however, shall not be construed to deny to the employer's physician the right to visit the injured employee at all reasonable times and under all reasonable conditions during total disability. The employee shall also have the right to record such examination by a recording device designated and paid for by the employee; provided that the examining physician or surgeon approves of the recording.
If an employee refuses to submit to, or the employee or the employee's designated chaperone in any way obstructs such examination, the employee's right to claim compensation for the work injury shall be suspended until the refusal or obstruction ceases and no compensation shall be payable for the period during which the refusal or obstruction continues.
(b) In cases where the employer is dissatisfied with the progress of the case or where major and elective surgery, or either, is contemplated, the employer may appoint a physician or surgeon of the employer's choice who shall examine the injured employee and make a report to the employer. If the employer remains dissatisfied, this report may be forwarded to the director.
Employer requested examinations under this section shall not exceed more than one per case unless good and valid reasons exist with regard to the medical progress of the employee's treatment. The cost of conducting the ordered medical examination shall be limited to the complex consultation charges governed by the medical fee schedule established pursuant to section 386-21(c). [L 1963, c 116, pt of §1; Supp, §97-78; HRS §386-79; gen ch 1985; am L 1995, c 234, §13; am L 1996, c 260, §4; am L 2017, c 172, §§1, 4; am L 2019, c 201, §1]
Case Notes
Labor and industrial relations appeals board's failure to apply this section, as amended, in its decision and order constituted harmless error, where record reflected that the reason for the 1995 medical examination ordered by the director related directly "to the medical progress of employee's treatment" in accordance with the mandate of this section as amended. 94 H. 487, 17 P.3d 219 (2001).
Cited: 760 F. Supp. 2d 1005 (2010).