Cardiopulmonary Exercise Stress Testing – an Update
Stephen L. Demeter
Search for other papers by Stephen L. Demeter in
Current site
Google Scholar
Restricted access


This article updates one published in The Guides Newsletter in January/February 1998 and reflects changing legislation in the workers’ compensation area and also in motor accident compensation. In the various Australian state and federal jurisdictions, impairment rating has become an important component of independent medical examinations, and in many areas, impairment guides have been adopted as a mandatory tool for assessing permanent impairment. For example, in the mid-1990s the state of Victoria established use of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fourth Edition, as the sole tool for evaluating impairment and continues to use this edition to the present time. Despite the publication of the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition, in 2000, the Motor Accidents Authority in New South Wales (NSW) continues to use the fourth edition, supplemented with the NSW Motor Accidents Authority Guidelines. In November 2001, Tasmania adopted the same guidelines that were being used by the NSW Motor Accidents Authority. Despite publication of the AMA Guides, Sixth Edition, in 2007, there has remained a general reticence in Australia to progress to use of this latest edition either as stand-alone impairment rating tools or an underpinning of the purpose-developed impairment guidelines already in place. A large number of Australian medical assessors have become used to the model based on the NSW WorkCover Guides for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, which interprets the AMA Guides, Fifth Edition.

  • 1.

    Rondinelli RD (ed.) Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 6th ed. Chicago: American Medical Association; 2008.

  • 2.

    American Thoracic Society. Diagnosis and initial management of nonmalignant disease related to asbestos. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2004; 170:691-715.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 3.

    Miller A. Application of pulmonary function tests to the evaluation of asbestosis. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences 1991; 643:145-148.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 4.

    Cocchiarella L, Andersson GBJ (eds.) Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. 5th ed. Chicago: American Medical Association, 2001.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 5.

    ATS/ACCP Statement on cardiopulmonary exercise testing. Am J Respir Crit Care Med 2003; 167: 211-277; 2003.

  • 6.

    Vermeulen RCW, Vermeulen van Eck IWG. Decreased oxygen extraction during cardiopulmonary exercise test in patients with chronic fatigue syndrome. J Translational Med 2014; 12: 1-6.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 7.

    Rasoul A, Amin S, Mostafa G. Cardiopulmonary exercise test findings in symptomatic mustard gas exposed cases with normal HRCT. Pul Circ 2013; 3:414-418.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 8.

    Lopes AJ, Costa W, Mafort T, De Sa Ferreira A, De Menezes SL, Silva Guimaraes F. Silicosis in sandblasters of shipyard versus silicosis in stone carvers in Brazil: a comparison of imaging findings, lung function variables and cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters. Revista Portuguesa de Pneumoligia 2012; 18:260-266.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
  • 9.

    Schwaiblmair M, Beinert T, Vogelmeier C, Fruhmann G. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing following hay exposure challenge in farmer's lung. European Resp J 1997; 10:2360-2365.

    • Search Google Scholar
    • Export Citation
All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 612 612 541
Full Text Views 21 21 0
PDF Downloads 0 0 0