Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Oct;82(9):1087-96.
doi: 10.1007/s00420-009-0423-8. Epub 2009 May 21.

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

Haije Wind  1 , Vincent Gouttebarge, P Paul F M Kuijer, Judith K Sluiter, Monique H W Frings-Dresen
Affiliations

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

Haije Wind et al. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2009 Oct.

Abstract

Purpose: To test whether Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) information lead insurance physicians (IPs) to change their judgment about the physical work ability of claimants with musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs).

Methods: Twenty-seven IPs scored twice the physical work ability of two claimants for 12 specified activities, using a visual analogue scale. One claimant performed an FCE, the other served as a control. Outcome measure was the difference between experimental and control group in number of shifts in the physical work ability for the total of 12 specified activities.

Results: The IPs changed their judgment about the work ability 141 times when using FCE information compared to 102 times when not using this information (P-value = 0.001), both in the direction of more and less ability.

Conclusions: The IPs change their judgment of the physical work ability of claimants with MSDs in the context of disability claim procedures more often when FCE information is provided.

PubMed Disclaimer

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Flow diagram of the procedure used in the study
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Altman DG (1991) Comparing groups—categorical data. In: Altman DG (ed) Practical statistics for medical research. Chapman and Hall, Boca Raton, London, New York, Washington DC, pp 229–272
    1. Anagnostis C, Mayer TG, Gatchel RJ, Proctor TJ (2003) The million visual analog scale: its utility for predicting tertiary rehabilitation outcomes. Spine 28:1051–1060. doi:10.1097/00007632-200305150-00018 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Baldwin M (2004) Reducing the costs of work-related musculoskeletal disorders: targeting strategies to chronic disability cases. J Electromyogr Kinesiol 14:33–41. doi:10.1016/j.jelekin.2003.09.013 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Bodian CA, Freedman G, Hossain S, Eisenkraft JB, Beilin Y (2001) The visual analogue scale for pain. Anesthesiology 95:1356–1361. doi:10.1097/00000542-200112000-00013 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Brooks PM (2006) The burden of musculoskeletal disease—a global perspective. Clin Rheumatol 25:778–781. doi:10.1007/s10067-006-0240-3 - DOI - PubMed

Publication types