Spine
Cervical, thoracic, lumbar. Posture, ROM, neuro screen, special tests.
Decision support. Smart exam templates, the MTUS / ACOEM alignment check, treatment-plan guardrails, and structured work restrictions are decision-support reference for the treating physician, who performs the exam, sets the plan and restrictions, and signs the chart. ChironAI does not make a regulatory clearance claim; see Disclosures.
The clinical half of every WC visit is the exam and the plan. The physician performs the exam; Chiron reasons the plan against it in body-region-specific templates that carry forward structured visit context and surface what changed since last time. Every proposed treatment is checked against MTUS (California) and ACOEM (national) at the point of care, not after the fact — every treatment plan is checked against MTUS and ACOEM before it is finalized, not after a UR denial teaches you the hard way.
Bring one month of EORs — you keep the findings either way.
Cervical, thoracic, lumbar. Posture, ROM, neuro screen, special tests.
Shoulder, elbow, wrist, hand. Provocative tests by region.
Hip, knee, ankle, foot. Gait, weight-bearing, joint-specific tests.
Cranial-nerve screen, neuro, neck ROM, occupational hearing/vision.
Cardiopulmonary, abdominal, occupational chest exposures.
Mental status exam and risk, with the LC §3208.3 compensability test captured alongside it — predominant cause, the violent-act standard, and the §36.5 service election.
A dedicated template rather than a line in the chest exam, with the §3212 safety-member presumptions where they apply.
Occupational disease as its own family: the statutory exposure routes, and the pesticide reporting duties recorded as separate obligations rather than one checkbox.
Structured visit context carries forward from the prior visit. Prior-value diff hints surface changes since last evaluation. The clinician’s time goes to clinical judgment, not retyping.
Prior-value diff hints
Lumbar flexion (ROM)
40° (2026-05-18) 55°
Improved 15° since the prior visit — supports a functional-improvement note for continued PT authorization.
Straight-leg raise, right
Positive at 35° Positive at 50°
Threshold moved higher — worth confirming whether radicular symptoms have changed since the last note.
Reported pain (0–10)
7 5
Down two points on the same scale used at the prior visit — carried forward automatically for the trend line.
California’s Medical Treatment Utilization Schedule (MTUS) and the ACOEM Practice Guidelines together define the standard of care for occupational injuries under workers’ compensation. Treatment that deviates from MTUS requires explicit rationale and faces utilization-review challenge.
Chiron checks the proposed plan against MTUS and ACOEM with a decompose-retrieve- evaluate reasoning chain, powered by Eve-Healthcare™ F5/reasoner, grounded in retrieval over twenty-five authentic California DWC guideline documents published by the Division of Workers’ Compensation (dir.ca.gov) — the real texts, not a paraphrase.
The proposed plan is broken into discrete, checkable claims — diagnosis, modality, frequency, duration — rather than evaluated as one paragraph.
Each claim is retrieved against the ingested California DWC MTUS and ACOEM guideline documents — twenty-five authentic published texts, the real language, not a paraphrase.
The retrieved passage is rated for how strongly it supports the claim, and the passage plus its citation are surfaced inline — the physician sees the guideline, not just a verdict.
Must review before final
Decision-support output. Clinician review and attestation required before this content is signed into the chart.
Physical therapy, 2x/week for 4 weeks (8 visits) — lumbar strain
Strong supportRepresentative excerpt — illustrates the citation format the product renders; confirm current guideline text at dir.ca.gov.
Repeat lumbar MRI at the 2-week follow-up
No verifiable MTUS / ACOEM match
Retrieval did not return a guideline passage that supports repeat imaging this early without new red-flag findings or a change in exam. Surfaced as an open flag rather than a suppressed gap or an invented citation — the physician decides.
Retrieval either returns a real, quotable passage that supports the plan, or it does not. When it does not, that is engineered to surface as an explicit “no verifiable match” flag — not a suppressed gap, and never an invented citation to fill the space. That is a trust moment by design: the same discipline that lets Chiron quote a guideline verbatim is the discipline that makes it say nothing when there is nothing to quote.
See how the reasoning is structured →Chiron drafts the treatment plan already checked against the guideline support tier above, and the drafting itself carries guardrails against the pitfalls that trigger a utilization-review denial — caught while the plan is still a draft, not after the request has already bounced.
UR-denial pitfall
Advanced imaging ordered before a documented conservative-care trial.
Guardrail that catches it
Flags the order if the chart does not yet show the guideline-concordant conservative-care trial — or the documented exception that justifies skipping it.
UR-denial pitfall
Modality frequency or duration that runs past the guideline-recommended course without a functional-improvement note.
Guardrail that catches it
Flags a plan that extends therapy without a documented functional gain — the exact pattern utilization review is trained to deny.
UR-denial pitfall
Opioid continuation past the point MTUS requires risk documentation.
Guardrail that catches it
Flags continued opioid therapy when the functional-goal reassessment and monitoring documentation MTUS requires is not yet on the chart.
UR-denial pitfall
A requested treatment with no MTUS / ACOEM indication for the diagnosis on record.
Guardrail that catches it
Surfaces the gap before the request goes out, with the nearest guideline-supported alternative for the physician to consider.
Maximum weight (lb), frequency (occasional/frequent/constant), reach (floor to overhead).
Sitting, standing, walking with duration limits per hour and per shift.
Pushing, pulling, gripping, fine manipulation with force and frequency parameters.
Climbing, ladders, heights, confined spaces, hazardous-environment exposures.
Sustained attention, complex decision-making, supervisory responsibility limits.
Restrictions composed once, exported to the DWC form, the employer modified-duty letter, and the patient-facing instructions — all from the same structured object. No transcription, no drift, no risk of inconsistency between surfaces.
Structured restriction (source)
Lifting: maximum 20 lb, occasional, floor to waist only.
DWC PR-2 — work status
Modified duty: lifting restricted to 20 lb maximum, occasional frequency, floor-to-waist reach only.
Employer modified-duty letter
The employee may return to modified duty. Please do not assign tasks requiring lifting over 20 lb, and limit lifting to occasional, floor-to-waist only.
A DWC PR-2 progress report is due every 45 days of continuing care, or sooner on a material change — return to work, new disability, a change in the treatment plan. That deadline rides alongside the exam and plan, not buried in a separate worklist, so the physician sees it while still in the visit.
PR-2 approaching
Next PR-2 due within the current 45-day cadence, computed against the California state holiday calendar. The plan drafted in this visit becomes the basis for that report.
The full deadline arithmetic — Form 5021, PR-2 cadence, PS/MMI, and the daily 07:00 surfacing cron — is covered in depth on the DWC reporting page.
A psychiatric, cardiopulmonary or toxic-exposure claim used to be documented in free text, because every template in the product was a body region. Each of these three is now a template in the same sense the others are, and each carries the statutory test its family actually turns on.
The compensability test, not just a diagnosis: whether actual events of employment were predominant as to all causes combined, the lowered violent-act standard, the six-month bar, and the post-termination conditions. Plus the §36.5 election to serve the report on a designated physician instead of the worker.
Where the worker is a safety member, the §3212-family presumptions apply — and §5402(b)(2) and §4663(e) name two different sets of sections, which is why a PTSD case gets the shortened clock and still owes an apportionment determination.
Exposure routes as the statute defines them, tempo of illness, and the pesticide duties — suspicion, the report to the local health officer, and the affidavit — recorded as three distinct obligations because that is what they are.
The clinical content in these three is drafted from the regulations and marked “awaiting clinical review” field by field until a physician signs it off. That state is visible in the product, and we would rather say so here than let you find it in a demo.

Tell us the workflow you want to see and who needs to be in the room. A member of our clinical and engineering team replies within two business days to arrange it — a real person, not a sequence.
Talk to our team →What happens after you send it
Prefer to talk now? +1 (949) 200-8668, or email hello@mindhyve.ai.