Newest BA logo
Your Solution to Permanent Impairment Evaluation
Assessing Impairment According to the AMA Guides August 23, 2007

In this issue

Iatrogenic Disability - A Critical Issue

Thanks to All Who Attended Our Series in San Diego!

Impairment of the Knee - Full Thickness Chondral Defect or Ununited Osteochondral Fracture with Normal Joint Spaces

AMA Guides 101 Webinar Series

Home Page Resource-www.impairment.info

WCC Conference In Chicago


 

Iatrogenic Disability - A Critical Issue
objectivity

Iatrogenic Disability - A Critical Issue

by Christopher Brigham MD

Iatrogenic disability refers to disability resulting from the actions of health care providers. It is imperative in assessing impairment and disability to understand the origin of reported difficulties. Impairment is based primarily on objective factors, whereas disability is a more complex concept.

Illness behavior is often reinforced by the behavior of the physicians, therapists, attorneys, family members and others involved with a case. It is recognized that iatrogenic disability is a consequence of inappropriate diagnostic labeling, unnecessary diagnostic studies, and inappropriate treatment. There may be problems with "medicalization", e.g. providing a medical diagnosis to explain subjective reports of discomfort that are not caused by an injury or illness and the application of a medical intervention to treat these reports. This contributes to somatization by magnifying preexisting, benign discomfort, providing a new disease attribution for it and therefore results in iatrogenic disability. The false diagnoses of an injury or illness can result in fixed illness attribution.

False labeling of a problem, e.g. providing a label of greater severity than is supported by the facts, may result in a conviction of a serious underlying problem and impairment. This is particularly problematic with a problem attributed to an injury, since it may reinforce an experience of anger. This may be influenced by issues of secondary gain, such as attributing current complaints to an injury as opposed to other causes (physical, behavioral or psychological), providing a payment mechanism for medical and therapy and services, permitting one to be less active or not having to work on a full-time basis, receiving financial awards, and obtaining the attention of others.

In some cases, it appears that some treating providers may not be aware of pre-existing problems (physical and psychological) or perhaps at times may not raise questions which could potentially jeopardize their ability to be paid for the treatments they provide. Issues of "false attribution" may be seen among many participants in the workers' compensation and personal injury arenas, including with patients and their care providers.

Diagnostic studies should be performed only when they will result in information that is needed to manage the patient correctly. Not all of the diagnostic studies performed in this case are consistent with current, accepted practice guidelines. Unfortunately, the performance of inappropriate studies can result in iatrogenic complications. For example, an imaging study of the spine may reveal findings of degenerative disease, a common finding among asymptomatic individuals. The patient, however, may perceive this as a significant issue. This may result in false concerns, unneeded treatment and incorrect assessments of impairment and disability.

Treatment must be designed to improve the functional well-being of the patient. For example, it is recognized in the peer-reviewed medical literature and in accepted practice guidelines that passive modalities (such as ultrasound, electrical stimulation, massage, manipulation, and injections) should be time-limited to the acute management of an injury (e.g. up to four to eight weeks). As early as possible treatment should reflect an active functional restoration approach. Inappropriate care may be detrimental to the individual by reinforcing dysfunctional behavior. Care must focus on improving an individual's likelihood of returning to a productive life, rather than services that are likely to promote more prolonged disability and diminish the individual's opportunities in life.
In assessing impairment and disability consider the possibility of iatrogenic impairment and disability. The associated costs, human even more than financial, are high.

_______________________

Impairment Rating Integrated Solution - IRIS

The best practices and most cost-effective claims management approach to impairment ratings is our Impairment Rating Integrated Solution (IRIS), which includes low cost screen of all ratings (Impairment Screen), detailed critique of erroneous ratings (Impairment Review), Impairment Profiling System data analysis (your cases and overall data, including impairments for specific diagnoses and physician profiling), and access to GuidesIQ.

The fee for this solution is nominal and the savings may be profound. For most impairment screens the cost is only $95 if the rating is correct or $195 if incorrect - a fraction of the cost of even a single percentage error. The fee for detailed critiques is based on the time involved for that case.

We will develop with you a process that is most effective for your organization. Ratings are reviewed typically within five days and invoices are sent for each case. The fee for the professional service is typically billed to the file. *If we review all of your ratings, we provide you on a complimentary basis our data analysis (otherwise quarterly licensing fee of $9500) and also access to GuidesIQ for your staff (otherwise annual membership fee of $897 per person). You also receive priority status. Most importantly you have a cost-effective mechanism to assure accurate impairment ratings.

We recommend a three month trial with this intervention. At the end of that time you assess the impact of this strategy and determine whether to continue and if any modifications are needed. Every client implementing this has continued with the screens and the return on investment has been several-fold.

Contact Mindy Brigham today and solve the challenge of erroneous impairment ratings.

_______________________

Register for the Workers' Compensation and Disability Conference & Expo in Chicago and receive a discounted rate!

We are pleased to offer you a discounted registration fee for attending the exhibit hall at the National Workers' Compensation Conference & Disability Expo in Chicago, IL on November 6-8, 2007.

We will be exhibiting in the exhibit hall and would love for you to stop by.

Register for the Expo at www.WCConference.com now, the $25 on-site registration fee is waived.




Summer is coming to an end, Autumn in upon us, but we aren't slowing down. We will be out and about at events/conferences in the next few months. Visit our website www.impairment.com for our upcoming teleseminars/webinars.


  • Thanks to All Who Attended Our Series in San Diego!
  • group book

    Our Summer Seminar series for the AMA Guides took place last weekend here in San Diego. Thank you again to all who came from all over the country and Canada to make these seminars a great success.

    Both seminars were participatory, focusing on case studies reflective of the most common and challenging situations encountered in workers' compensation.

    They also included practical demonstrations of physical examination techniques (including inclinometry) and insights to Apportionment.

  • Stay tuned for our next exciting series...details to follow soon.

  • Also be sure to check out our website www.impairment.com for additional training and impairment information.

  • Impairment of the Knee - Full Thickness Chondral Defect or Ununited Osteochondral Fracture with Normal Joint Spaces
  • The Guides Newsletter - Important Clinical Concepts from Past Issues
    by Craig M. Uejo MD, MPH, QME, CIME, CIR

    This is the next article in a series written to assist evaluators in their use and interpretation of The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition (Cocchiarella L, Anderson G, AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition, AMA Press, 2001). It will be used to help summarize key points of clarification documented in past issues of The Guides Newsletter. References to specific issues will be provided to allow anyone the opportunity to review the entire issue/article for assistance in understanding and accuracy of reporting.

    This particular article will discuss the issues of rating a full thickness knee articular cartilage injury or ununited osteochondral fracture in the case where radiographic cartilage interval measurements are "normal." This issue was discussed in the March/April 2005 edition of The Guides Newsletter - Knee Arthritis. Christopher Brigham, MD; Charles Brooks, MD; and James Talmage, MD were the authors.

    Knee - Osteochondral Fracture or Full-Thickness Chondral Defect with Normal Joint Space Measurements

    Knee contusion injuries can result in articular cartilage injuries such as full-thickness chondral defects or small ununited osteochondral fractures without documentable impairment based on the methodologies outlined in the Guides, 5th ed. Namely, there can be no motion loss, instability, strength loss, neurological deficits, etc. Arthritis can be a ratable finding if on radiographs there is documented joint space narrowing equal to or less than 3mm. If, however, there are normal joint spaces, the question raised by some evaluators is "could there be ratable impairment absent these methodologies?"

    The Guides Newsletter article documents the following argument; Yes, there could be 7% lower extremity or 3% whole person impairment similar to a case of knee osteoarthritis with "mild" joint space narrowing:

    The last sentence of text pertaining to diagnosis- based estimates states, "A diagnosis of full thickness chondral defect or ununited osteochondral fracture requires arthroscopic or surgical confirmation" (5th ed, 549). As implied in an article titled "Challenges with Chapter 17, The Lower Extremities 21" and in the Question and Answer section of The Guides Newsletter November-December 2003 issue, the Committee for the Lower Extremities had proposed changes to Table 17-33, Impairment Estimates for Certain Lower Extremity Impairments (5th ed, 546- 547), that would have resulted in impairment ratings for these conditions being listed. The rating for a full thickness chondral defect or ununited osteochondral fracture with a normal cartilage interval would be the same as that for mild arthritis in Table 17-31, Arthritis Impairments Based on Roentgenographically Determined Cartilage Intervals (5th ed, 544). For the knee, either of these conditions would result in 3% whole person or 7% lower extremity impairment.

    In summary:

    The Guides 5th ed. recommends considering rating a knee injury that resulted in documentable articular cartilage damage with a full-thickness chondral defect or an ununited osteochondral fracture and normal joint space measurements with 7% lower extremity or 3% whole person impairment. Look for additional articles in this series, The Guides Newsletter - Important Clinical Concepts from Past Issues, coming in upcoming issues of this Brigham and Associates Ezine.

  • AMA Guides 101 Webinar Series
  • Brigham and Associates and Insurance Education Association Offer AMA Guides 101 Webinar Series

    The Fundamentals is an overview on the use of the AMA Guides, with a focus on principles of impairment evaluation, and assessment of spine, upper extremity, lower extremity, neurological, and pain impairments.

    The seminar is offered in four convenient two hour sessions, totaling eight hours of superb training. This seminar is designed for physicians, attorneys, and claims staff with minimal or no experience in the use of the Guides. It is also an excellent review for individuals who may have attended an introductory course and desire further review and clarification. Most individuals require two to three learning experiences to grasp the complexities of impairment evaluation.

    At the conclusion of these Guides Webinars you will be able to:

    • Demonstrate the appropriate use of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment in assessing musculoskeletal, neurological and pain impairment.

    • Explain how to review an impairment evaluation report to determine if the rating is accurate or not.

    • Describe specific claims and legal strategies to manage erroneous ratings.
    The schedule for this series is as follows:
    • Tuesday, September 25th
      2:00-4:00 p.m. PST:
      Overview, Lower Extremity

    • Tuesday, October 2nd
      2:00-4:00 p.m. PST:
      Upper Extremity

    • Tuesday, October 16th
      2:00-4:00 p.m. PST:
      Spine

    • Wednesday, October 31
      2:00-4:00 p.m. PST:
      Other Chapters & Strategies

    For More Info Click Here

  • Home Page Resource-www.impairment.info
  • impairmentinfoscreenshot

    The Internet has extensive resources that are invaluable to professionals involved in the workers' compensation, automobile casualty, personal injury and disability fields. There are significant challenges in identifying the most useful resources and discerning what is accurate and what is not. The July - August 2007 issue of the Guides Newsletter included an article identifying many useful sites.

    To facilitate linking to these resources we developed a web-page where we organized the most useful sites (both professional and commonly used - such as Google and Amazon) and provided direct links.

    The result is the perfect "Home Page" for claims professionals, attorneys and physicians working in this field. Please visit www.impairment.info today.

    To select this as your home page, in Internet Explore, go to "Tools", select "Internet Options", go to the "General" tab, and define http://www.impairment.info/ as your home page. We welcome your feedback on this resource and welcome your suggestions on other sites.

    619-299-7377