This appeal arises pursuant to the Texas Workers’ Compensation Act, TEX. LAB. CODE ANN. § 401.001 et seq. (1989 Act). A contested case hearing was held on March 31, 2001. The hearing officer determined that the __________, compensable injury of the respondent (claimant) extends to and includes bilateral carpal tunnel syndrome (CTS). Appellant (carrier) appealed this determination on sufficiency grounds. The file does not contain a response from claimant.
DECISION
We affirm.
We have reviewed the complained-of determination and conclude that the issue involved a fact question for the hearing officer. The hearing officer reviewed the record and decided what facts were established. The hearing officer’s determination is supported by claimant’s testimony about his duties; the September 27, 2000, report from Dr. M regarding causation; and the test results. See Texas Workers’ Compensation Commission Appeal No. 962516, decided January 22, 1997. We conclude that the hearing officer’s determination is not so against the great weight and preponderance of the evidence as to be clearly wrong or manifestly unjust. Cain v. Bain, 709 S.W.2d 175, 176 (Tex. 1986). Regarding carrier’s assertions that a specific injury cannot “extend” to a repetitive trauma injury and that it did not accept a repetitive trauma neck injury, we note that the type of injury carrier accepted is not an issue before us. Carrier accepted an injury to claimant’s neck. The hearing officer did not determine that a specific injury extended to a repetitive trauma injury, and we perceive no error in that regard.
We affirm the hearing officer’s decision and order.
Judy L. S. Barnes – Appeals Judge
CONCUR:
Thomas A. Knapp – Appeals Judge
Philip F. O’Neill – Appeals Judge