Assessment of physical work ability: the utility of functional capacity evaluation for insurance physicians.

2008 ◽  
Vol 16 (3) ◽  
pp. 131-131
Author(s):  
J. A. G. Wijnen
Keyword(s):  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work Ability ◽  
Insurance Physicians

scholarly journals Complementary value of functional capacity evaluation for physicians in assessing the physical work ability of workers with musculoskeletal disorders

2008 ◽  
Vol 82 (4) ◽  
pp. 435-443 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haije Wind ◽  
Vincent Gouttebarge ◽  
P. Paul F. M. Kuijer ◽  
Judith K. Sluiter ◽  
Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal Disorders ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work Ability ◽  
Complementary Value

How to assess physical work-ability with Functional Capacity Evaluation methods in a more specific and efficient way?

Work ◽  
2010 ◽  
Vol 37 (1) ◽  
pp. 111-115 ◽  
Author(s):  
Vincent Gouttebarge ◽  
Haije Wind ◽  
P. Paul F.M. Kuijer ◽  
Judith K. Sluiter ◽  
Monique H.W. Frings-Dresen
Keyword(s):  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
Evaluation Methods ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work Ability

scholarly journals Effect of Functional Capacity Evaluation information on the judgment of physicians about physical work ability in the context of disability claims

2009 ◽  
Vol 82 (9) ◽  
pp. 1087-1096 ◽  
Author(s):  
Haije Wind ◽  
Vincent Gouttebarge ◽  
P. Paul F. M. Kuijer ◽  
Judith K. Sluiter ◽  
Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen
Keyword(s):  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work Ability ◽  
Evaluation Information

scholarly journals Functional Capacity Evaluation for Work-Related Injuries to the Foot and Ankle is Associated with Low Return to Work Rate

2019 ◽  
Vol 4 (4) ◽  
pp. 2473011419S0022
Author(s):  
Alexander J. Idarraga ◽  
Adam Wright-Chisem ◽  
Daniel D. Bohl ◽  
Simon Lee ◽  
Johnny Lin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Return To Work ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Foot And Ankle ◽  
Inclusion Criteria ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Work Related Injury ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Light Medium

Category: Hindfoot, Ankle, Midfoot/Forefoot, Injury and Rehabilitation Introduction/Purpose: The functional capacity evaluation (FCE) is used to determine a worker’s physical ability after treatment of a work-related injury. This evaluation is a critical determinant in the administration of benefits and the decision to return to work (RTW). The purpose of this study is to characterize FCE results and ability to RTW among patients treated for work- related orthopaedic injuries to the foot or ankle. Methods: A retrospective medical record review from the practices of four orthopaedic foot and ankle surgeons was conducted. Inclusion criteria were (1) treatment of a work-related injury to the foot or ankle, (2) at least 2 years of follow-up from the injury, and (3) documentation of an associated FCE. The FCE report and clinic notes were used to determine the patient’s pre-injury job requirement (Department of Labor Office category: light, medium, or heavy), post-injury FCE-determined work ability (light, medium, or heavy), specific FCE- or physician-imposed work restrictions, and clearance for RTW. Patients were considered cleared to RTW if their FCE-determined work ability met or exceeded their pre-injury job requirement and if there were no additional restrictions imposed by the FCE or physician that would prevent them from functioning in their pre-injury role. Results: A total of 188 patients met inclusion criteria. Missteps/rotational injuries (44.1%), falls from height (22.3%), and crush injuries (20.7%) were the most common mechanisms. 74.4% of patients had FCE-determined work abilities at or above their pre- injury job requirements, and 63.3% of patients were eventually cleared for RTW. The median time from injury to clearance for RTW was 2.0 ± 1.3 years. Reasons for not being cleared to RTW included failure to meet the pre-injury job requirement (67.2%), specific FCE-imposed limitations (28.3%), or specific physician-imposed limitations (4.5%). Less strenuous pre-injury job requirement was positively associated with both FCE-determined work ability meeting pre-injury job requirement and clearance for RTW (p<0.001 and p=0.034, respectively; Table 1). Conclusion: Approximately two-thirds of patients undergoing FCE after a work-related foot or ankle injury are cleared to RTW. However, it takes a median of two years to achieve this clearance. Patients with jobs that are more physically strenuous are less likely to be able to return to those jobs after injury to the foot or ankle.

Responsiveness of the Physical Work Performance Evaluation, a Functional Capacity Evaluation, in Patients with Low Back Pain

2008 ◽  
Vol 18 (1) ◽  
pp. 58-67 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-José Durand ◽  
Bruno Brassard ◽  
Quan Nha Hong ◽  
Jacques Lemaire ◽  
Patrick Loisel
Keyword(s):  
Performance Evaluation ◽  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Performance ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Capacity Evaluation

Selbsteinschätzung der funktionellen Leistungsfähigkeit (SELF): Messeigenschaften in der beruflich orientierten medizinischen Rehabilitation

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Bühne ◽  
Torsten Alles ◽  
Christian Hetzel ◽  
Ingo Froboese ◽  
Maurizio Trippolini
Keyword(s):  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Ability ◽  
A Priori ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Work Ability Score

Zusammenfassung Ziel Ermittlung der konkurrenten, diskriminanten und prognostischen Validität der Selbsteinschätzung der funktionellen Leistungsfähigkeit (SELF) bei orthopädischen Patienten der beruflich orientierten medizinischen Rehabilitation. Material und Methoden In einer prospektiven Kohortenstudie wurden Patienten aus vier Einrichtungen mit beruflich orientierter medizinischer Rehabilitation rekrutiert. Als Außenkriterien für die Überprüfung der konkurrenten Validität dienten der Work Ability Score (WAS) und die Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE)-basierte Einschätzung der zulässigen Arbeitsschwere nach REFA. Für die diskriminante Validität wurde das Ultra-Kurz-Screening (UKS) verwendet. Die a priori definierten Hypothesen wurden anhand von bivariaten und partiellen Korrelationsmaßen überprüft. Die prognostische Validität wurde mittels logistischer Regressionsmodelle berechnet. Zielgröße war die Rückkehr in Arbeit (RTW) drei Monate nach Reha-Ende. Ergebnisse Die Daten von 227 rekrutierten Probanden wurden analysiert. Hinsichtlich der konkurrenten Validität bestätigten sich die a priori definierten Hypothesen (0,4≤r≤0,6) zum WAS (r=0,41) und der zulässigen Arbeitsschwere (r=0,50). Der Zusammenhang mit dem UKS lag erst nach Kontrolle der derzeitigen Schmerzen (r=−0,24) im erwarteten Bereich (−0,1≤r≤−0,3). Zur Überprüfung der prognostischen Validität wurden die von 127 Probanden verfügbaren Nachbefragungsdaten ausgewertet. Ein Anstieg des SELF um einen Punkt war nach Kontrolle der Arbeitsschwere der Tätigkeit mit einer 1,07-fach (p<0,001) höheren RTW-Chance assoziiert. Schlussfolgerung Die konkurrente und diskriminante Validität des SELF wurde bei orthopädischen Patienten der beruflich orientierten medizinischen Rehabilitation bestätigt. Das Instrument erwies sich darüber hinaus als prognostisch valide. Die Anpassungsgüte des ausschließlich auf dem SELF basierenden Modells war jedoch gering.

The Interrater Reliability of a Functional Capacity Evaluation: The Physical Work Performance Evaluation

2004 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 119-129 ◽  
Author(s):  
Marie-José Durand ◽  
Patrick Loisel ◽  
Stéphane Poitras ◽  
Richard Mercier ◽  
Susan R. Stock ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Performance Evaluation ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Interrater Reliability ◽  
Work Performance ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Work ◽  
Capacity Evaluation

Clinical Update: Functional Capacity Evaluations and Disability

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Author(s):  
Glenn Pransky
Keyword(s):  
Direct Observation ◽  
Functional Capacity ◽  
Work Capacity ◽  
Functional Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Whole Body ◽  
Validity Of Results ◽  
Job Tasks ◽  
Capacity Evaluation ◽  
Physical Abilities ◽  
The Relationship

Abstract According to the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, a functional capacity evaluation (FCE) measures an individual's physical abilities via a set of activities in a structured setting and provides objective data about the relationship between an impairment and maximal ability to perform work activities. A key distinction between FCEs and self-reported activities of daily living is that the former involve direct observation by professional evaluators. Numerous devices can quantify the physical function of a specific part of the musculoskeletal system but do not address the performance of whole body tasks in the workplace, and these devices have not been shown to predict accurately the ability to perform all but the simplest job tasks. Information about reliability has been proposed as a way to identify magnification and malingering, but variability due to pain and poor comprehension of instructions may cause variations in assessments. Structured work capacity evaluations involve a set of activities but likely underestimate the individual's ability to do jobs that involve complex or varying activities. Job simulations involve direct observation of an individual performing actual job tasks, require a skilled and experienced evaluator, and raise questions about expense, time, objectivity and validity of results, and interpretation of results in terms of the ability to perform specific jobs. To understand the barriers to return to work, examiners must supplement FCEs with information regarding workplace environment, accommodations, and demotivators.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document