Browse

You are looking at 1 - 10 of 14 items for

  • Refine by Access: Content accessible to me x
Clear All
Joseph A. Hirsch
,
Steven Mandel
,
Kurt T. Hegmann
,
Alexandra G. Stratyner
,
Stuart Gitlow
,
James B. Talmage
, and
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract

There is an epidemic of drug overdose–related fatalities. Recent data indicate that the age-adjusted death rate from overdoses nearly quintupled over a 20-year period (2001-2021) to 32.4 per 100,000. More than 70% of these fatalities were caused by opioid overdose, especially the synthetic drug, fentanyl. Despite an increase in substance abuse and dependency treatment, mortality and morbidity associated with opioid, cocaine, psychostimulant, benzodiazepine, alcohol, and tobacco use disorders continue to rise. To better understand the factors contributing to this crisis, the multifaceted phenomenon of drug addiction is explored. The controversial chronic, relapsing “disease of the brain” model, which emphasizes the role of the neurotransmitter dopamine, the ventral tegmental area, and the nucleus accumbens, is critically considered. In addition, more expansive neurobiological models that include a host of other neurotransmitters, brain regions, and cognitive processes, as well as classical and operant conditioning and social learning theory to help better understand compulsive drug taking, tolerance, risk-taking, and relapse, were examined. For this, the roles of genetics and epigenetics vs individual agency in drug addiction were considered. The economic and occupational consequences borne both individually and societally are enormous. Ultimately, whether the presence of drug addiction satisfies the criteria for a disability remains a conundrum, especially from the perspectives of financial support (eg, Social Security, private insurance companies) vs regulation (eg, licensing agencies).

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Stephen L. Demeter

Abstract

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]) infections began in late 2019/early 2020 and quickly achieved pandemic proportions. Of significance is that, while most individuals recover, some do not. Those who have persistent symptoms are diagnosed with long COVID, or post-COVID syndrome. Individuals with long COVID develop symptoms related to multiple organ systems. One of the more frequent systems affected is the pulmonary system. Individuals develop shortness of breath and/or fatigue. These are sometimes unrelated to any abnormalities on physiological or radiographic testing. More frequently, however, there are abnormalities found radiographically (especially on computed tomography) and on physiological testing (generally, abnormalities in the diffusion capacity for carbon monoxide or in a 6-minute walk test with the oxygen saturation being measured during the test). This article reviews many published articles and is organized by the duration of signs, symptoms, and/or testing abnormalities after the initial diagnosis of COVID-19. The date of maximum medical improvement is suggested to be 12 months, although currently this cannot be definitively supported. More time will need to pass so that appropriate data can be collected.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Stephen L. Demeter

Abstract

The Centers for Disease Control has defined long COVID—or post–COVID-19 conditions—as a clinical syndrome reflecting a wide range of new, persistent, or recurring health problems experienced by individuals infected with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) (coronavirus disease 2019 [COVID-19]). What is known is that symptoms in these individuals diminish with time. It is unclear how long it takes to achieve maximum medical improvement. This article addresses the cardiac manifestations (including the pulmonary vascular and peripheral vascular manifestations) of long COVID. Emphasis is placed on recent articles (published in the last year) and issues relating to impairment evaluations.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Charl Els
,
Barry Gelinas
,
Rose M. Carter
, and
Les Kertay

Abstract

Independent medical examinations (IMEs) are elective evaluations of clinical conditions and differ from a clinical consultation in several important ways. They are conducted in many medicolegal contexts and are performed by a regulated health professional who is not the treating health care provider. An IME seeks objective information about the examinee's diagnoses, functional abilities and impairments, and other features relevant to addressing medicolegal-related cases by relying on multiple data sources. Best practice guidelines have been established for the completion of physical IMEs. However, similar mental and behavioral disorder (M&BD) standards are less common, and M&BD IMEs often do not follow a consistent process. This article offers guidance on applying and adapting existing standards to M&BD IMEs. We outlined the appropriate use of psychiatric nomenclature and how to apply recent changes to Chapter 14 of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. The article further offers a mechanism for introducing greater objectivity into an otherwise subjective process by employing relevant psychological validity testing and conducting a coherence analysis in formulating an opinion. In summary, we provide a synopsis of current best practices and offer the examiner a method for aligning M&BD IMEs with equally high standards of excellence.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Garson M. Caruso
,
Les Kertay
, and
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract

Persistent symptoms, physical signs, and abnormal test results after acute coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) illness have emerged as a significant problem in the current and ongoing severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus pandemic. Finding a rational balance between compelling subjective symptoms and limited objective findings in patients with post-COVID-19 conditions is challenging. We advise caution in adopting attributions, explanations, and management strategies, and especially in conferring formal disability status, for these disorders until we understand them more completely. The prevalent uncertainties threaten both overevaluation and overtreatment, with substantial personal and societal consequences, and all stakeholders need to be both intellectually open and cautious going forward. This article highlights several concerns in evaluating and treating patients with enduring COVID-19-related illness.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Sarah H. Gulick
,
Steven Mandel
,
Edward A. Maitz
, and
Christopher R. Brigham

Abstract

The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) virus affects the mental health of many. Isolation, fear of infection, and social distancing may affect psychological functioning. Research continues to evolve and reveal the psychological symptoms reported by coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients. Depression, anxiety, posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and psychosis have been reported in the literature for COVID-19 patients. Potential preliminary treatment recommendations include various forms of psychotherapy, such as dialectical behavioral therapy, mindfulness-based cognitive therapy, and cognitive behavioral therapy. More research should be done regarding other additional treatment recommendations that may facilitate psychological healing in COVID-19 patients.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
James B. Talmage
,
Mark H. Hyman
,
Christopher R. Brigham
,
Sarah H. Gulick
, and
Leslie Burton

Abstract

Patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) may have persistent symptoms beyond the normally expected illness resolution. This disease was not diagnosed before late 2019, and therefore, we have more limited experience in understanding all of its outcomes. Thus, clinical, functional, and permanent impairment assessment is challenging. Symptoms including fatigue, dyspnea, and cognitive difficulties have been referred to as “post-acute COVID,” “long COVID,” or “long haulers.”

Patients who present for assessment of causation, maximum medical improvement (MMI), and permanent impairment can be challenging. For some examinees, after 6 to 12 months without outgoing improvement and with appropriate investigation, treatment, and rehabilitation, the examinee can be considered at MMI. However, because this disorder is new and appropriate treatment may be unclear, the time to achieve MMI is less certain. Physicians may use approaches in the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), to help define MMI. As science evolves, so will our understanding of how to evaluate chronic problems associated with COVID-19.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Jay Blaisdell
and
James B. Talmage

Abstract

Appropriately assessing impairment mandates that the physician be familiar with the principles of assessing impairment, as reflected in Chapter 1, Conceptual Foundations and Philosophy, and Chapter 2, Practical Applications of the Guides. Based on this knowledge, the physician will then apply the processes and criteria provided in specific chapters. All impairment rating reports should be divided into three main sections: clinical evaluation, analysis of the findings, and discussion. To obtain the highest level of competency, the rating physician should be familiar with jurisdictional requirements that effectively supplant AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) methodology.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
Robert B. Snyder
and
James B. Talmage

Abstract

The decision about whether a case of documented COVID-19 illness is accepted as occupationally acquired and thus work compensable is made by insurers, or if contested, by judges or administrative bureaus. Causation for COVID-19 may be difficult to show because of the lack of accurate information and difficulty in meeting some of the criteria established by Bradford Hill. Nevertheless, physicians will be asked for medical records and documentation of illness. This article provides preliminary guidance to assist physicians in responding to insurers or workers compensation agencies' requests for information on the medial aspects of COVID-19.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter
James B. Talmage
,
Mark H. Hyman
, and
Robert B. Snyder

Abstract

The current pandemic of COVID-19 cases includes cases identified in emergency medical technicians, nurses, physicians, and others with occupational exposure to the SARS-CoV-2 virus. Many of these health care professionals have filed workers' compensation claims that have been accepted. Each accepted claim will eventually need a physician to declare the individual “at maximal medical improvement” or the equivalent phrase in the jurisdiction involved. The next step is for the physician to rate permanent impairment, if present, so the case can be administratively closed. The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) is used by many jurisdictions, but the AMA Guides does not mention COVID-19 or have guidance on how to assess individuals for impairment after recovery from this illness. This article provides preliminary guidance on rating permanent impairment within the respiratory, cardiac, vascular, neurologic, renal, gastrointestinal, and/or mental systems in COVID-19 survivors. Current references on the manifestations of COVID-19 illness in these body systems are included, which can be used as references to support documented impairment related to this illness.

in AMA Guides® Newsletter