scholarly journals Response to Letter to Editor Related to What Industrial Categories are Workers at Excess Risk of Filing a Covid-19 Workers’ Compensation Claim? A Study Conducted in 11 Midwestern U.S. States

2022 ◽  
Vol 64 (1) ◽  
pp. e37-e38
Author(s):  
Edward J. Bernacki ◽  
Dan L. Hunt ◽  
Larry Yuspeh ◽  
Robert A. Lavin ◽  
Nimisha Kalia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Excess Risk ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Claim

scholarly journals What Industrial Categories Are Workers at Excess Risk of Filing a Covid-19 Workers’ Compensation Claim? A Study Conducted in 11 Midwestern U.S. States

2020 ◽  
Vol Publish Ahead of Print ◽  
Author(s):  
Edward J. Bernacki ◽  
Dan L. Hunt ◽  
Larry Yuspeh ◽  
Robert A. Lavin ◽  
Nimisha Kalia ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Excess Risk ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Claim

Impairment Tutorial: Rating Facial Disfigurement After an Injury

1998 ◽  
Vol 3 (4) ◽  
pp. 6-6
Author(s):  
Marc T. Taylor
Keyword(s):  
Current Work ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Loss Of Function ◽  
Facial Disfigurement ◽  
Work Related ◽  
Work Related Injury ◽  
Compensation Claim ◽  
Impairment Ratings

Abstract This article discusses two important cases that involve the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides). First, in Vargas v Industrial Com’n of Arizona, a claimant had a pre-existing non–work-related injury to his right knee as well as a work-related injury, and the issue was apportionment of the pre-existing injury. The court held that, under Arizona's statute, the impairment from the pre-existing injury should be subtracted from the current work-related impairment. In the second case, Colorado courts addressed the issue of apportionment in a workers’ compensation claim in which the pre-existing injury was asymptomatic at the time of the work-related injury (Askey v Industrial Claim Appeals Office). In this case, the court held that the worker's benefits should not be reduced to account for an asymptomatic pre-existing condition that could not be rated accurately using the AMA Guides. The AMA Guides bases impairment ratings on anatomic or physiologic loss of function, and if an examinee presents with two or more sequential injuries and calculable impairments, the AMA Guides can be used to apportion between pre-existing and subsequent impairments. Courts often use the AMA Guides to decide statutorily determined benefits and are subject to interpretation by courts and administrative bodies whose interpretations may vary from state to state.

scholarly journals Health risk factors as predictors of workers' compensation claim occurrence and cost

2016 ◽  
Vol 74 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Natalie V Schwatka ◽  
Adam Atherly ◽  
Miranda J Dally ◽  
Hai Fang ◽  
Claire vS Brockbank ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Risk Factors ◽  
Health Risk ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Health Risk Factors ◽  
Compensation Claim

A Workers’ Compensation Claim Population for Occupational Asthma

CHEST Journal ◽  
1995 ◽  
Vol 107 (3) ◽  
pp. 634-641 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan M. Tarlo ◽  
Paul Corey ◽  
Irvin Broder ◽  
Gary Liss
Keyword(s):  
Occupational Asthma ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Claim

Is Employer-Directed Medical Care Associated With Decreased Workers’ Compensation Claim Costs?

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (5) ◽  
pp. e232-e237 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xuguang (Grant) Tao ◽  
Nina Leung ◽  
Nimisha Kalia ◽  
Robert A. Lavin ◽  
Larry Yuspeh ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Medical Care ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Claim

Prescription Dispensing Patterns Before and After a Workers’ Compensation Claim

2018 ◽  
Vol 60 (7) ◽  
pp. 644-655 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nancy Carnide ◽  
Sheilah Hogg-Johnson ◽  
Andrea D. Furlan ◽  
Pierre Côté ◽  
Mieke Koehoorn
Keyword(s):  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Claim ◽  
Before And After

scholarly journals 0182 Predictors of Workers’ Compensation Claim Duration among Workers Disabled Due to Low Back Pain

2014 ◽  
Vol 71 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A22.3-A23
Author(s):  
Jason Busse ◽  
Ivan Steenstra ◽  
Shanil Ebrahim ◽  
Diane Heels-Ansdell ◽  
Stephen Walter ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Low Back Pain ◽  
Back Pain ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Low Back ◽  
Compensation Claim

Workers' Compensation Claims for Needlestick Injuries Among Healthcare Workers in Washington State, 1996-2000

2005 ◽  
Vol 26 (9) ◽  
pp. 775-781 ◽  
Author(s):  
Syed M. Shah ◽  
David Bonauto ◽  
Barbara Silverstein ◽  
Michael Foley
Keyword(s):  
Healthcare Workers ◽  
Needlestick Injury ◽  
Washington State ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Nursing Facilities ◽  
Needlestick Injuries ◽  
Skilled Nursing ◽  
Compensation Claim ◽  
Compensation Claims ◽  
State Fund

AbstractObjectives:To characterize accepted workers' compensation claims for needlestick injuries filed by healthcare workers (HCWs) in non-hospital compared with hospital settings in Washington State.Design:Descriptive study of all accepted workers' compensation claims filed between 1996 and 2000 for needlestick injuries.Participants:All Washington State HCWs eligible to file a state fund workers' compensation claim and those who filed a workers' compensation claim for a needlestick injury.Results:There were 3,303 accepted state fund HCW needlestick injury claims. The incidence of needlestick injury claims per 10,000 full-time-equivalent HCWs in hospitals was 158.6; in dental offices, 104.7; in physicians' offices, 87.0; and in skilled nursing facilities, 80.8. The most common mechanisms of needlestick injury by work location were as follows: for hospitals, suturing and other surgical procedures (16.7%), administering an injection (12.7%), and drawing blood (10%); for dentists' offices, recapping (21.3%) and cleaning trays and instruments (18.2%); for physicians' offices, disposal (22.2%) and administering an injection (10.2%); and for skilled nursing facilities, disposal (23.7%) and administering an injection (14.9%). Nurses accounted for the largest (29%) proportion of HCWs involved, followed by dental assistants (17%) and laboratory technicians and phlebotomists (12%) in non-hospital settings. Rates of needlestick injury claims increased for non-hospital settings by 7.5% annually (95% confidence interval [CI95], 4.89% to 10.22%; P < .0001). Rates decreased for hospital settings by 5.8% annually, but the decline was not statistically significant (CI95, -12.50% to 1.34%; P < .1088). HCWs were exposed to hepatitis B, hepatitis C, and human immunodeficiency viruses in non-hospital settings.Conclusion:There was a difference in the incidence rate and mechanisms of needlestick injuries on review of workers' compensation claim records for HCWs in non-hospital and hospital settings.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document