Comparative Analysis of Impairment Ratings From the 5th to 6th Editions of the AMA Guides.
retrospective_cohort · Level III
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 30252722.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1097/JOM.0000000000001440.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
The association of American Medical Association's (AMA) Guides edition with impairment ratings is uncertain. We used data from a consecutive sample of 249 injured workers referred for an independent evaluation 10 months before and after assessors switched from the 5th to the 6th edition of the AMA Guides. The median whole person impairment rating was 7.0% (interquartile range [IQR]: 4 to 14) for 131 claimants assessed with the 5th edition of the Guides, and 4.0% (IQR: 2 to 8) for 118 claimants assessed with the 6th edition (P-value for difference: 0.002). Multivariable analysis showed a 36.4% relative reduction (95% confidence interval [CI] 17.2% to 57.3%) in impairment rating with the 6th edition of the Guides versus the 5th edition. The 6th edition of the AMA Guides provides systematically lower impairment ratings for injured workers than the 5th edition.
Medical subject headings
- Guidelines as Topic
- Occupational Injuries
- Work Capacity Evaluation
- Workers' Compensation