AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Sixth Edition: A Response to the NCCI Study
Robert D. Rondinelli
Search for other papers by Robert D. Rondinelli in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach
Search for other papers by Marjorie Eskay-Auerbach in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
,
Mohammed I. Ranavaya
Search for other papers by Mohammed I. Ranavaya in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
, and
Christopher R. Brigham
Search for other papers by Christopher R. Brigham in
Current site
Google Scholar
PubMed
Close
Restricted access

Abstract

The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, (AMA Guides), Sixth Edition, is the recognized international standard for assessing impairment. The National Council on Compensation Insurance (NCCI) conducted a comparative study to examine the effects on impairment ratings in three states that have switched from the fifth to the sixth edition. The purpose and objectives of this article are as follows: 1) to provide a brief review of the conceptual framework and terminology of disablement and of the current model of disability in the AMA Guides and also to underscore the importance of the construct of medical impairment to compensation schemes within workers' compensation and other disability systems; 2) to examine the AMA Guides in terms of its origin, purpose, distribution, applications, and misapplications; 3) to examine the changes in the sixth edition in terms of efforts to direct change and improve upon the AMA Guides; 4) to examine the merits and shortcomings of the NCCI study and its conclusions within a broader context of inherent sources of variance in impairment ratings, as well as the content validity, reliability, and reproducibility of the ratings themselves; 5) to provide recommendations regarding the implications of this study for the use of the sixth and earlier editions of the AMA Guides, and to suggest new directions for much needed critical research.

  • 1.

    American Medical Association: Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Sixth Edition. Chicago, American Medical Association, 2007.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 2.

    National Council on Compensation Insurance, Inc. Impact on impairment ratings from the American Medical Association's Sixth Edition of the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. Boca Raton, NCCI Holdings, Inc, 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Waddell G, Burton AK, Aylward M: A biopsychosocial model of sickness and disability. Guides Newsletter 2008; May-June:120.

  • 4.

    World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva, Switzerland, World Health Organization, 2001.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    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.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 6.

    Rondinelli RD. Changes for the new AMA Guides to Impairment Ratings, Sixth Edition: Implications and applications for physician disability evaluations. PMR 2009;1(7):64356.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    McGeary M, Ford M, McCutchen SR, et al, (eds): IOM Committee on Medical Evaluation of Veterans for Disability Compensation. A 21st Century System for Evaluating Veterans for Disability Benefits. The Rating Schedule. Washington, DC, The National Academies Press, 2007, 92138.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Spieler EA, Barth PS, Burton JF, et al. Recommendations to guide revision of the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. JAMA 2000;283(4):51923.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    American Medical Association. Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fifth Edition. Chicago, American Medical Association, 2000.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 10.

    Nattrass CL, Nitschke JE, Disler PB, Chou MJ, Ooi KT. Lumbar spine range of motion as a measure of physical and functional impairment: an investigation of validity. Clin Rehabil. 1999;13(3):2118.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 11.

    Rondinelli RD, Murphy J, Esler A, et al. Estimation of normal lumbar flexion with surface inclinometry: a comparison of three methods. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 1992;71(4):21924.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 12.

    Brigham CR, Uejo C, Dilbeck L, Uehlein WF. Impairment Ratings: Observations Based on Review of More Than 6,000 Cases. Guides Newsletter. March/April 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 13.

    Bonner RE. Presentation on Key Trends in National Medical Programs at Workers' Compensation Institute, Orlando, Florida, August 20, 2012.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 14.

    Brigham CR, Uejo C, Dilbeck L, et al. Impairment ratings: observations based on review of more than 6,000 cases. Guides Newsletter. March/April 2010, 1.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 15.

    Bonner RE. Presentation on key trends in national medical programs at Workers' Compensation institute, Orlando, FLA, August 20, 2012.

  • 16.

    Brigham CR, Uejo C, McEntire A, et al. Comparative analysis of AMA Guides ratings by Fourth, Fifth and Sixth Editions. Guides Newsletter. Jan/Feb 2010.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 17.

    Gloss DS, Wardle MG. Reliability and validity of American Medical Association's guides to ratings of permanent impairment. JAMA. 1982;248:22922296.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 18.

    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;80:10341042.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 19.

    Rondinelli RD, Dunn W, Hassanein KM, et al. A simulation of hand impairments: effects on upper extremity function and implications toward medical impairment rating and disability determination. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:13581363.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 20.

    Forst L, Friedman L, Chukwu A. Reliability of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52(12):12013.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 21.

    Rondinelli RD. Commentary on Reliability of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52(12):12045.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 22.

    American Medical Association. Available at: www.ama-assn.org

  • 23.

    American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons. Available at: www.aaos.org

  • 24.

    American Academy of Disability Evaluating Physicians. Available at: www.aadep.org.

  • 25.

    American Board of Independent Medical Examiners. Available at: www.abime.org.

  • 26.

    American College of Occupational and Environmental Medicine. Available at: www.acoem.org

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 469 469 332
Full Text Views 25 25 1
PDF Downloads 0 0 0
Save