Evidence status: CURRENT WORKERS’ COMPENSATION CONTRACT-CONTENT RULE. Minnesota’s workers’ compensation opioid contract is unusually detailed and specifies multiple patient and provider obligations.

Required contract subjects

  • Treatment goals and the opioid-treatment program.
  • Compliance with non-opioid treatment prescribed as part of the integrated program.
  • Only one replacement refill or prescription for lost or stolen medication, at the provider’s discretion and only the first time.
  • No early renewal of prescriptions or medication.
  • Patient notice to other health-care providers about the contract before receiving prescription medications.
  • Patient notice to the opioid prescriber about medications received from other providers.
  • Advance arrangements for refills when the prescriber is unavailable.
  • Provider availability or coverage for episodic pain not responsive to planned interventions.
  • Potential taper and discontinuation consequences for contract noncompliance.
  • Regular visits and exact adherence to the prescribed opioid regimen.
  • Abstinence from illegal substances.
  • Cooperation with assessments and urine drug testing.
  • Permission for the provider to access the Prescription Monitoring Program and communicate with other treating providers.
  • Cooperation with referrals.
  • Dated signatures of patient and provider.

Single-provider structure

All medications and treatment modalities for the work injury must be prescribed or referred by the single health-care provider who is party to the written treatment contract, or by a designated proxy documented in the medical record.

Disclosure of outside medications and medical cannabis

The patient must inform the prescribing provider about short-term opioid or controlled-drug prescriptions from other clinicians and about use of Minnesota medical cannabis so the treatment program can be coordinated.

Primary source

Reviewed: October 5, 2026.

Evidence boundary: These detailed clauses belong to the workers’ compensation treatment contract and should not be misrepresented as the mandatory content of Minnesota’s separate intractable-pain agreement statute.