Impairment Rating Insights
Christopher R. Brigham
Search for other papers by Christopher R. Brigham in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
W. Frederick Uehlein
Search for other papers by W. Frederick Uehlein in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Craig Uejo
Search for other papers by Craig Uejo in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Leslie Dilbeck
Search for other papers by Leslie Dilbeck in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

This article addresses a number of issues regarding impairment evaluation and the use of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides). First, impairment is not synonymous with disability, and, as noted in the sixth and previous editions of the AMA Guides, no direct correlation exists between impairment and work restrictions or loss of earning capacity. An impairment rating does not directly equate to a permanent disability rating and does not solely determine compensation. The AMA Guides creates the opportunity for consistency of impairment ratings among physicians, but impairment ratings must be performed according to standards defined in the AMA Guides. Impairment rating values and methods in the AMA Guides can change between editions based on medical reasons. It is too early to determine the effects of changes in the sixth edition of the AMA Guides pending the accumulation of adequate experience using this edition, until impairment ratings associated with specific diagnoses can be compared, and until an adequate sample of cases can be evaluated and compared using the fifth and sixth editions. Use of the sixth edition may result in some lower impairment ratings, but this edition also expands the number of ratable conditions compared to previous versions. Finally, impairment determination is a medical issue, and more reasonable approaches should be developed to translate impairment into financial rewards.

Contributor Notes

Christopher R. Brigham, MD, MMS, President, Brigham and Associates, Inc. (www.impairment.com), Portland, ME; Email:cbrigham@brighamassociates.com
W. Frederick Uehlein, Esq., Founder and Chairman of Insurance Recovery Group (www.irgfocus.com), Framingham, MA. Email: wfuehlein@irgfocus.com
  • 1.

    Burton JF. Workers' compensation cash benefits: part one: the building blocks. Workers Compensation Policy Review. March/April 2008:15-28.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    Brigham CR, Mueller K, Van Zet D, Northrup D, Whitney E, McReynolds M. Comparative analysis of third edition, revised, fourth, and fifth edition ratings: the state of colorado study. Guides Newsletter. January/February 2004; 1-3,9-11.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Brigham CR, Mueller K, Van Zet D, Northrup D, Whitney E, McReynolds M. Comparative analysis of third edition, revised, fourth, and fifth edition ratings: the state of colorado study. Guides Newsletter. March/April 2004; 1-3, 6-16.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Brigham CR, Mueller K, Van Zet D, Northrup D, Whitney E, McReynolds M. Comparative analysis of third edition, revised, fourth, and fifth edition ratings: the state of colorado study. Guides Newsletter. May/June 2004; 1-3, 6-12.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    Burd JG. The educated guess: doctors and permanent partial disability percentage. J Tenn Med Assoc. 1980;783:44l.

  • 6.

    Clark WL, Haldeman, Johnson P. et al.Back impairment and disability determination: another attempt at objective, reliable rating. Spine. 1988;13:332-341.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Pryor ES. Flawed promises: critical evaluation of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Harvard Law Rev. 1990;l03:964-976.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Spieler EA, Barth PS, Burton JF, et at. Recommendations to guide revision of the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. JAMA. 2002 83:519-523.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 144 144 24
Full Text Views 35 35 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
Save