Chapter 1: Conceptual Foundations and Philosophy
- 1.1 History of the AMA Guides
- 1.2 Directions for the Sixth Edition
- 1.3 The International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF): A Contemporary Model of Disablement
- 1.4 Measurement Issues
- 1.5 Balancing Science and Clinical Judgment
- 1.6 Evidence Requirements
- 1.7 The Application of Functional Assessment
- 1.8 The Need for Internal Consistency and a Uniform Template
- 1.8a ICF Scale of Capacity and Performance Qualifiers (Levels 0–4)
- 1.8b Basic Components of the AMA Guides Template
- 1.8c Generic Template for Uniformity and Ease of Application
- 1.8d General Principles and Rules for Calculating Impairment
- 1.8e History of Clinical Presentation
- 1.8f Physical Examination Findings
- 1.8g Objective Test Results
- 1.8h Functional History or Assessment
- 1.8i Determining the Burden of Treatment Compliance (BOTC)
- 1.9 AMA Guides Editorial Process and Digital Delivery
- 1.10 Summary
- References
-
1.
Ranavaya MI, Rondinelli RD. The major US disability and compensation systems: origins and historical overview. In: Rondinelli RD, Katz RT, eds. Impairment Rating and Disability Evaluation. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 2000:3–16.
-
2.
Ranavaya MI, Andersson GB. The impairment and disability evaluations. In: Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Polatin PB, eds. Occupational Musculoskeletal Disorders: Function, Outcomes & Evidence. Philadelphia, Pa: Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins; 2001.
-
3.
Yaron R. The Laws of Eshnuna, Section 42. Jerusalem-Leiden: The Magnes Press, The Hebrew University; 1988:69.
-
4.
Fischer Drew K. The Lombard Laws. Philadelphia, Pa: University of Pennsylvania Press; 1973:62.
-
5.
American Medical Association. A guide to the evaluation of permanent impairment of the extremities and back. JAMA. 1958;166(suppl):1–122.
-
6.
American Medical Association. In: Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association; 1971.
-
7.
American Medical Association. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 3rd ed. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association; 1988.
-
8.
American Medical Association. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 4th ed. Chicago, Ill: American Medical Association; 1993.
-
9.
Cocchiarella L, Andersson GBJ, eds. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 5th ed. Chicago, Ill; AMA Press; 2001.
-
10.
Rondinelli RD, ed. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 6th ed. Chicago, Ill: AMA Press; 2008.
-
11.
Burd JG. The educated guess: doctors and permanent partial disability percentage. J Tenn Med Assoc. 1980;783:441.
-
12.
Clark WL, Haldeman S, Johnson P, et al.Back impairment and disability determination: another attempt at objective, reliable rating. Spine. 1988;13:332–341.
-
13.
Hinderer SR, Rondinelli RD, Katz RT. Measurement issues in impairment rating and disability evaluation. In Rondinelli RD, Katz RT, eds. Impairment Rating and Disability Evaluation. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 2000:35–52.
-
14.
Pryor ES. Flawed promises: critical evaluation of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Harvard Law Rev. 1990;103:964–976.
-
15.
Rondinelli RD, Duncan PW. The concepts of impairment and disability. In Rondinelli RD, Katz RT, eds. Impairment Rating and Disability Evaluation. Philadelphia, Pa: WB Saunders Co; 2000:17–33.
-
16.
Rondinelli RD, Dunn W, Hassanein KM, et al.Simulation of hand impairments: effects on upper extremity function and implications toward medical impairment rating and disability determination. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:1358–1563.
-
17.
Rondinelli RD, Katz RT. Merits and shortcomings of the American Medical Association Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 5th edition: a physiatric perspective. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am. 2002;13:355–370.
-
18.
Spieler EA, Barth PS, Burton JF, et al.Recommendations to guide revision of the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. JAMA. 2000;283:519–523.
-
19.
Brigham CR, Uejo C, Dilbeck L, Walker P. Errors in impairment rating: challenges and opportunities. J Workers Compensation. 2006;15(4):19–42.
-
20.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 2001.
-
21.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps: A Manual of Classification Relating to the Consequences of Disease. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1980.
-
22.
29 Code of Federal Regulations. Part 1630. Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA): Equal employment opportunity for individuals with disabilities. 56 Federal Register (144):35726–35753(1991).
-
23.
Nagi S. Disability and Rehabilitation: Legal, Clinical and Self-Concepts and Measurement. Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State University Press; 1969.
-
24.
Pope AM, Tarlov AR. Disability in America. Toward a National Agenda for Prevention. Washington DC: National Academy Press; 1991.
-
25.
World Health Organization. ICIDH-2 International Classification of Impairments, Activities and Participation: A Manual of Dimensions of Disablement and Functioning Beta-1 Draft for Field Trials. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization; 1997.
-
26.
Weigl M, Cieza A, Andersen C, et al.Identification of relevant ICF categories in patients with chronic health conditions: a Delphi exercise. J Rehabil Med Suppl. 2004;44:12–21.
-
27.
Talo SA, Rytökoski UM. BPS-ICF model, a tool to measure biopsychosocial functioning and disability within ICF concepts: theory and practice updated. Int J Rehabil Res. 2016;39(1):1–10. doi:.
-
28.
Youngstrom MJ. Occupational therapy practice framework: The evolution of our professional language. Am J Occup Ther. 2002;56:609–639.
-
29.
Hamilton B, Granger CV, Sherwin FS, et al.A Uniform National Data System for medical rehabilitation. In: Fuhrer MJ, ed. Rehabilitation Outcomes: Analysis and Measurement. Baltimore, Md: Paul H. Brookes Publishing Co; 1987:137–147.
-
30.
Krebs DE. Measurement theory. Phys Ther. 1987;67: 1834–1839.
-
31.
Merbitz C, Morris J, Grip JC. Ordinal scales and foundations of misinference. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:308–312.
-
32.
Wright BD, Linacre JM. Observations are always ordinal; measurements, however, must be interval. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1989;70:857–860.
-
33.
Mayer T, Kondraske G, Beals S, Gatchel R. Spinal range of motion: accuracy and sources of error with inclinometric measurements. Spine. 1997;22:1976–1984.
-
34.
McCarthy ML, McAndrew MP, MacKenzie EJ, et al.Correlation between the measures of impairment according to the modified system of the American Medical Association, and function. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 1998;80:1034–1042.
-
35.
Gloss DS, Wardle MG. Reliability and validity of American Medical Association's guide to ratings of permanent impairment. JAMA. 1982;248:2292–2296.
-
36.
Concato J, Shah N, Horwitz RI. Randomized, controlled trials, observational studies, and the hierarchy of research designs. N Engl J Med. 2000;342:1887–1892.
-
37.
Harbour R, Miller J. A new system for grading recommendations in evidence-based guidelines. BMJ. 2001;323:334–336.
-
38.
Atkins D, Best D, Briss PA, et al.Grading quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2004;328:1490–1494.
-
39.
Acute Low Back Problems in Adults. Rockville, Md: Agency for Health Care Policy and Research, US Dept of Health and Human Services; 1994. Clinical Practice Guideline No. 14, AHCPR publication 95–0642.
-
40.
Cieza A, Ewert T, Ustun TB, et al.Development of ICF Core Sets for patients with chronic conditions. J Rehabil Med. 2004;36:9–11.
-
41.
Grill E, Stucki G, Scheuringer M, et al.Validation of International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health (ICF) Core Sets for early postacute rehabilitation facilities: comparison with 3 other functional measures. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2006;85:640–649.
-
42.
Bennett KA, Osborne RH. Interobserver measurement reliability in anthropometry. Hum Biol. 1986;58:751–759.
-
43.
Helmer-Hirschberg O. Analysis of the Future: The Delphi Method. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation; 1967. https://www.rand.org/pubs/papers/P3558.html
-
44.
Institute of Medicine. Clinical Practice Guidelines We Can Trust. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press; 2011. doi:.
-
45.
Criteria Committee of the New York Heart Association. Diseases of the Heart and Blood Vessels: Nomenclature and Criteria for Disease. 6th ed. Boston, Mass: Little, Brown & Co; 1964.
-
46.
Fox SM III, Naughton JP, Haskell WL. Physical activity and the prevention of coronary heart disease. Ann Clin Res. 1971;3:404–432.
-
47.
Epler GR. Disability evaluation. In: Fishman AP, ed. Pulmonary Diseases and Disorders. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 1988:567–575.
-
49.
Ferris BG. Epidemiology standardization project: American Thoracic Society. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1978;118(6, pt 2):1–120.
-
50.
Anagnostis C, Gatchel RJ, Mayer TG. The pain disability questionnaire: a new psychometrically sound measure for chronic musculoskeletal disorders. Spine. 2004;29:2290–2303; discussion 2303.
-
51.
Beaton DE, Wright JG, Katz JN, Upper Extremity Collaborative Group. Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of 3 item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am. 2005;87:1038–1046.
-
52.
Lower limb outcomes questionnaire. American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Web site. http://www.aaos.org/research/outcomes/outcomes_lower.asp. Updated August 2005. Accessed October 23, 2007.
-
53.
Moser KM, Bokinsky GE, Savage RT, et al.Results of a comprehensive rehabilitation program: physiologic and functional effects on patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Arch Intern Med. 1980;140:1596–1601.
-
54.
Doyle D, Hanks GWC, MacDonald N, eds. Oxford Textbook of Palliative Medicine. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. 1993:109.
-
55.
Rondinelli RD, ed. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 6th ed. Chicago, Ill: AMA Press; 2022. Page intentionally left blank.
| All Time | Past Year | Past 30 Days | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Full Text Views | 107 | 107 | 98 |
