A consultative examination is a physical or mental examination or test purchased for a claimant at the Board's request and expense. If the claimant's medical sources cannot provide sufficient medical evidence about the claimant's impairment(s) in order to enable the Board to determine whether the claimant is disabled, the Board may ask the claimant to have one or more consultative examinations or tests. The decision to purchase a consultative examination will be made on an individual case basis in accordance with the provisions of §§ 220.53 through 220.56. Selection of the source for the examination will be consistent with the provisions of § 220.64 (Program Integrity).

If the Board arranges for an examination or test, the claimant will be provided with reasonable notice of the date, time, and place of the examination or test and the name of the person who will do it. The Board will also give the examiner any necessary background information about the claimant's impairment(s).

(a) General. The Board may find that the claimant is not disabled if he or she does not have good reason for failing or refusing to take part in a consultative examination or test which was arranged by the Board. If the individual is already receiving an annuity and does not have a good reason for failing or refusing to take part in a consultative examination or test which the Board arranged, the Board may determine that the individual's disability has stopped because of his or her failure or refusal. The claimant for whom an examination or test has been scheduled should notify the Board as soon as possible before the scheduled date of the examination or test if he or she has any reason why he or she cannot go to the examination or test. If the Board finds that the claimant has a good reason for failure to appear, another examination or test will be scheduled.

(b) Examples of good reasons for failure to appear. Some examples of good reasons for not going to a scheduled examination or test include—

(1) Illness on the date of the scheduled examination or test;

(2) Failure to receive notice or timely notice of an examination or test;

(3) Receipt of incorrect or incomplete information about the examination or test; or

(4) A death or serious illness in the claimant's immediate family.

(c) Objections by a claimant's physician. The Board should be notified immediately if the claimant is advised by his or her treating physician not to take an examination or test. In some cases, the Board may be able to secure the information which is needed in another way or the treating physician may agree to another type of examination for the same purpose.

(a)(1) General. The decision to purchase a consultative examination for a claimant will be made after full consideration is given to whether the additional information needed (e.g., clinical findings, laboratory tests, diagnosis, and prognosis, etc.) is readily available from the records of the claimant's medical sources. Upon filing an application for a disability annuity, a claimant will be required to obtain from his or her medical source(s) information regarding the claimed impairments. The Board will seek clarification from a medical source who has provided a report when that report contains a conflict or ambiguity, or does not contain all necessary information or when the information supplied is not based on objective evidence. The Board will not, however, seek clarification from a medical source when it is clear that the source either cannot or will not provide the necessary findings, or cannot reconcile a conflict or ambiguity in the findings provided from the source's records. Therefore, before purchasing a consultative examination, the Board will consider not only existing medical reports, but also the background report containing the claimant's allegations and information about the claimant's vocational background, as well as other pertinent evidence in his or her file.

(2) When the Board purchases a consultative examination, we will use the report from the consultative examination to try to resolve a conflict or ambiguity if one exists. The Board will do this by comparing the persuasiveness and value of the evidence. The Board will also use a consultative examination to secure needed medical evidence the file does not contain such as clinical findings, laboratory tests, a diagnosis or prognosis necessary for decision.

(b) Situations requiring a consultative examination. A consultative examination may be purchased when the evidence as a whole, both medical and non-medical, is not sufficient to support a decision on the claim. In addition, other situations, such as one or more of the following, will normally require a consultative examination (these situations are not all-inclusive):

(1) The specific additional evidence needed for adjudication has been pinpointed and high probability exists for obtaining it through purchase.

(2) The additional evidence needed is not contained in the records of the claimant's treating sources.

(3) Evidence that may be needed from the claimant's treating or other medical sources cannot be obtained for reasons beyond his or her control, such as death or noncooperation of the medical source.

(4) Highly technical or specialized medical evidence which is needed is not available from the claimant's treating sources.

(5) A conflict, inconsistency, ambiguity or insufficiency in the evidence must be resolved.

(6) There is an indication of a change in the claimant's condition that is likely to affect his or her ability to function, but current severity is not documented.

(7) Information provided by any source appears not to be supported by objective evidence.

A consultative examination will not be purchased in the following situations (these situations are not all-inclusive):

(a) In disabled widow(er) benefit claims, when the alleged month of disability is after the end of the 7-year period specified in § 216.38 and there is no possibility of establishing an earlier onset, or when the 7-year period expired in the past and all the medical evidence in the claimant's file establishes that he or she was not disabled on or before the expiration date.

(b) When any issues about the actual performance of substantial gainful activity have not been resolved.

(c) In childhood disability claims, when it is determined that the claimant's alleged childhood disability did not begin before the month of attainment of age 22. In this situation, the claimant could not be entitled to benefits as a disabled child unless found disabled before age 22.

(d) When, on the basis of the claimant's allegations and all available medical reports in his or her case file, it is apparent that he or she does not have an impairment which will have more than a minimal effect on his or her capacity to work.

(e) Childhood disability claims filed concurrently with the employee's claim and entitlement cannot be established for the employee.

(f) Survivors childhood disability claims where entitlement is precluded based on non-disability factors.

(a) When a claimant requests a review of the Board's initial determination at the reconsideration level of review, consultative medical examinations will be obtained when needed, but not routinely. A consultative examination will not, if possible, be performed by the same physician or psychologist used in the initial claim.

(b) Where the evidence tends to substantiate an affirmation of the initial denial but the claimant states that the treating physician or psychologist considers him or her to be disabled, the Board will assist the claimant in securing medical reports or records from the treating physician.

(a) Where there is a conflict in the medical evidence at the hearing level of review before a hearings officer, the hearings officer will try to resolve it by comparing the persuasiveness and value of the conflicting evidence. The hearings officer's reasoning will be explained in the decision rationale. Where such resolution is not possible, the hearings officer will secure additional medical evidence (e.g., clinical findings, laboratory test, diagnosis, prognosis, etc.) to resolve the conflict. Even in the absence of a conflict, the hearings officer will also secure additional medical evidence when the file does not contain findings, laboratory tests, a diagnosis, or a prognosis necessary for a decision.

(b) Before requesting a consultative examination, the hearings officer will ascertain whether the information is available as a result of a recent examination by any of the claimant's medical sources. If it is, the hearings officer will request the evidence from that medical practitioner. If contact with the medical source is not productive for any reason, or if there is no recent examination by a medical source, the hearings officer will obtain a consultative examination.

(a) Additional evidence needed for disability determination. The types of examinations and tests the Board will purchase depends upon the additional evidence needed for the disability determination. The Board will purchase only the specific evidence needed. For example, if special tests (such as X-rays, blood studies, or EKG) will furnish the additional evidence needed for the disability determination, a more comprehensive medical examination will not be authorized.

(b) The physician or psychologist selected to do the examination or test must be qualified. The physician's or psychologist's qualifications must indicate that the physician or psychologist is currently licensed in the State and has the training and experience to perform the type of examination or test requested. The physician or psychologist may use support staff to help perform the examination. Any such support staff must meet appropriate licensing or certification requirements of the State. See also § 220.64.

(c) Use of video teleconferencing technology. Video teleconferencing technology (VTT) may be used for a psychological or a psychiatric consultative examination provided that the following requirements are met:

(1) The examining physician or psychologist is currently state-licensed in the state in which the provider practices;

(2) The examining physician or psychologist has the training and experience to perform the type of examination requested;

(3) The examining physician or psychologist has access to video teleconferencing technology;

(4) The examining physician or psychologist is permitted to perform the exam in accordance with state licensing laws and regulations;

(5) The protocol for the examination does not require physical contact;

(6) The claimant has the right to refuse a VTT examination without penalty; and

(7) The VTT examination complies with all requirements in this subpart governing consultative examinations.

A claimant or his or her representative may object to his or her being examined by a designated physician or psychologist. If there is a good reason for the objection, the Board will schedule the examination with another physician or psychologist. A good reason may be where the consultative examination physician or psychologist had previously represented an interest adverse to the claimant. For example, the physician or psychologist may have represented the claimant's employer in a worker's compensation case or may have been involved in an insurance claim or legal action adverse to the claimant. Other things the Board will consider are: language barrier, office location of consultative examination physician or psychologist (2nd floor, no elevator, etc.), travel restrictions, and examination by the physician or psychologist in connection with a previous unfavorable determination. If the objection is because a physician or psychologist allegedly “lacks objectivity” (in general, but not in relation to the claimant personally) the Board will review the allegations. To avoid a delay in processing the claimant's claim, the consultative examination in such a case will be changed to another physician or psychologist while a review is being conducted. Any objection to use of the substitute physician or psychologist will be handled in the same manner. However, if the Board or the Social Security Administration had previously conducted such a review and found that the reports of the consultative physician or psychologist in question conform to the Board's guidelines, then the Board will not change the claimant's examination.

In an unusual case, a hearings officer may have reason to request an examination by a particular physician, psychologist or institution. Some examples include the following:

(a) Conflicts in the existing medical evidence require resolution by a recognized authority in a particular specialty:

(b) The impairment requires hospitalization for diagnostic purposes; or

(c) The claimant's treating physician or psychologist is in the best position to submit a meaningful report.

The Board will not order diagnostic surgical procedures such as myelograms and arteriograms for the evaluation of disability under the Board's disability program. In addition, the Board will not order procedures such as cardiac catheterization and surgical biopsy. However, if any of these procedures have been performed as part of a workup by the claimant's treating physician or other medical source, the results may be secured and used to help evaluate an impairment(s)'s severity.

Consulting physicians or psychologists will be fully informed at the time the Board contacts them of the following obligations:

(a) General. In scheduling full consultative examinations, sufficient time should be allowed to permit the examining physician to take a case history and perform the examination (including any needed tests).

(b) Report content. The reported results of the claimant's medical history, examination, pertinent requested laboratory findings, discussions and conclusions must conform to accepted professional standards and practices in the medical field for a complete and competent examination. The facts in a particular case and the information and findings already reported in the medical and other evidence of record will dictate the extent of detail needed in the consultative examination report for that case. Thus, the detail and format for reporting the results of a purchased examination will vary depending upon the type of examination or testing requested. The reporting of information will differ from one type of examination to another when the requested examination relates to the performance of tests such as ventilatory function tests, treadmill exercise tests, or audiological tests. The medical report must be complete enough to help the Board determine the nature, severity, duration of the impairment, and residual functional capacity. Pertinent points in the claimant's medical history, such as a description of chest pain, will reflect the claimant's statements of his or her symptoms, not simply the physician's or psychologist's statements or conclusions. The examining physician's or psychologist's report of the consultative examination will include the objective medical facts.

(c) Elements of a complete examination. A complete examination is one which involves all the elements of a standard examination in the applicable medical specialty. When a complete examination is involved, the report will include the following elements:

(1) The claimant's major or chief complaint(s).

(2) A detailed description, within the area of speciality of the examination, of the history of the claimant's major complaint(s).

(3) A description, and disposition, of pertinent “positive,” as well as “negative,” detailed findings based on the history, examination and laboratory test(s) related to the major complaint(s) and any other abnormalities reported or found during examination or laboratory testing.

(4) The results of laboratory and other tests (e.g., x-rays) performed according to the requirements stated in the Board's directions to the examining physician or psychologist.

(5) The diagnosis and prognosis for the claimant's impairment(s).

(6) A statement as to what the claimant can still do despite his or her impairment(s) (except in disability claims for remarried widows and widowers, and surviving divorced spouses). This statement must describe the consultative physician's or psychologist's opinion concerning the claimant's ability, despite his or her impairment(s), to do basic work activities such as sitting, standing, lifting, carrying, handling objects, hearing, speaking, and traveling: and, in cases of mental impairment(s), the consultative physician's or psychologist's opinion as to the claimant's ability to reason or make occupational, personal, or social adjustments.

(7) When less than a complete examination is required (for example, a specific test or study is needed), not every element is required.

(d) Signature requirements. All consultative examination reports will be personally reviewed and signed by the physician or psychologist who actually performed the examination. This attests to the fact that the physician or psychologist doing the examination or testing is solely responsible for the report contents and for the conclusions, explanations or comments provided with respect to the history, examination and evaluation of laboratory test results.

(a) The Board will review the report of the consultative examination to determine whether the specific information requested has been furnished. The Board will consider these factors in reviewing the report:

(1) Whether the report provides evidence which serves as an adequate basis for decision-making in terms of the impairment it assesses.

(2) Whether the report is internally consistent. Whether all the diseases, impairments and complaints described in the history are adequately assessed and reported in the physical findings. Whether the conclusions correlate the findings from the claimant's medical history, physical examination and laboratory tests and explain all abnormalities.

(3) Whether the report is consistent with the other information available to the Board within the specialty of the examination requested. Whether the report fails to mention an important or relevant complaint within the speciality that is noted on other evidence in the file (e.g., blindness in one eye, amputations, flail limbs or claw hands, etc.).

(4) Whether the report is properly signed.

(b) If the report is inadequate or incomplete, the Board will contact the examining consultative physician or psychologist, give an explanation of the Board's evidentiary needs, and ask that the physician or psychologist furnish the missing information or prepare a revised report.

(c) Where the examination discloses new diagnostic information or test results which are significant to the claimant's treatment, the Board will consider referral of the consultative examination report to the claimant's treating physician or psychologist.

(d) The Board will take steps to ensure that consultative examinations are scheduled only with medical sources who have the equipment required to provide an adequate assessment and record of the level of severity of the claimant's alleged impairments.

All implications of possible conflict of interest between Board medical consultants and their medical practices will be avoided. Board review physicians or psychologists will not perform consultative examinations for the Board's disability programs without prior approval. In addition, they will not acquire or maintain, directly or indirectly, including any member of their families, any financial interest in a medical partnership or similar relationship in which consultative examinations are provided. Sometimes one of the Board's review physicians or psychologists will have prior knowledge of a case (e.g., the claimant was a patient). Where this is so, the physician or psychologist will not participate in the review or determination of the case. This does not preclude the physician or psychologist from submitting medical evidence based on prior treatment or examination of the claimant.

The Board will not use in its program any individual or entity who is excluded, suspended, or otherwise barred from participation in the Medicare or Medicaid programs, or any other Federal or Federally-assisted program; who has been convicted, under Federal or State law, in connection with the delivery of health care services, of fraud, theft, embezzlement, breach of fiduciary responsibility or financial abuse; who has been convicted under Federal or State law of unlawful manufacture, distribution, prescription, or dispensing of a controlled substance; whose license to provide health care services is revoked or suspended by any State licensing authority for reasons bearing on professional competence, professional conduct, or financial integrity; who has surrendered such a license while formal disciplinary proceedings involving professional conduct were pending; or who has had a civil monetary assessment or penalty imposed on such individual or entity for any activity described in this section or as a result of formal disciplinary proceedings. Also see §§ 220.53 and 220.57(b).