Experts Opinion on the Use of Normative Data for Functional Capacity Evaluation in Occupational and Rehabilitation Medicine and Disability Claims
详细信息 查看全文
- 作者：Remko Soer (1) (2) (3)
Michiel F. Reneman (1) (2)
Monique H.W. Frings-Dresen (4)
P. Paul F. M Kuijer (4) - 关键词：Congresses ; Work capacity evaluation ; Focus group
- 刊名：Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation
- 出版年：2014
- 出版时间：December 2014
- 年：2014
- 卷：24
- 期：4
- 页码：806-811
- 全文大小：177 KB
- 参考文献：1. Brouwer S, Reneman MF, Dijkstra PU, Groothoff JW, Schellekens JM, Goeken LN. Test-retest reliability of the isernhagen work systems functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain. J Occup Rehabil. 2003;13(4):207-8. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
2. Reneman MF, Brouwer S, Meinema A, Dijkstra PU, Geertzen JH, Groothoff JW. Test-retest reliability of the isernhagen work systems functional capacity evaluation in healthy adults. J Occup Rehabil. 2004;14(4):295-05. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
3. Soer R, Gerrits EH, Reneman MF. Test-retest reliability of a WRULD functional capacity evaluation in healthy adults. Work. 2006;26(3):273-0.
4. Gouttebarge V, Wind H, Kuijer PP, Frings-Dresen MH. Reliability and validity of functional capacity evaluation methods: a systematic review with reference to blankenship system, ergos work simulator, ergo-kit and isernhagen work system. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2004;77(8):527-7. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
5. Lakke SE, Soer R, Geertzen JH, Wittink H, Douma RK, van der Schans CP, et al. Construct validity of functional capacity tests in healthy workers. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2013;14:180 2474-14-180. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
6. van der Meer S, Trippolini MA, van der Palen J, Verhoeven J, Reneman MF. Which instruments can detect submaximal physical and functional capacity in patients with chronic nonspecific back pain? A systematic review. Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2013;38(25):E1608-5.
7. Gross DP, Battie MC, Asante AK. Evaluation of a short-form functional capacity evaluation: less may be best. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(3):422-5. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
8. Gross DP, Battie MC. Does functional capacity evaluation predict recovery in workers-compensation claimants with upper extremity disorders? Occup Environ Med. 2006;63(6):404-0. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
9. Kuijer PP, Gouttebarge V, Wind H, van Duivenbooden C, Sluiter JK, Frings-Dresen MH. Prognostic value of self-reported work ability and performance-based lifting tests for sustainable return to work among construction workers. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38(6):600-. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
10. Cheng AS, Cheng SW. The predictive validity of job-specific functional capacity evaluation on the employment status of patients with nonspecific low back pain. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52(7):719-4. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
11. Streibelt M, Blume C, Thren K, Reneman MF, Mueller-Fahrnow W. Value of functional capacity evaluation information in a clinical setting for predicting return to work. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2009;90(3):429-4. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
12. Wind H, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PP, Sluiter JK, Frings-Dresen MH. Complementary value of functional capacity evaluation for physicians in assessing the physical work ability of workers with musculoskeletal disorders. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2009;82(4):435-3. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
13. Pas LW, Kuijer PP, Wind H, Sluiter JK, Groothoff JW, Brouwer S, et al. Clients-and RTW experts-view on the utility of FCE for the assessment of physical work ability, prognosis for work participation and advice on return to work. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2014;87(3):331-.
14. Wind H, Gouttebarge V, Kuijer PP, Sluiter JK, Frings-Dresen MH. The utility of functional capacity evaluation: the opinion of physicians and other experts in the field of return to work and disability claims. Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2006;79(6):528-4. title="It opens in new window">CrossRef
15. Reesink DD, Jorritsma W, Reneman MF. Basis for a functional capacity evaluation methodology for patients with work-related neck disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17(3):436-9. title="It opens in new - 作者单位：Remko Soer (1) (2) (3)
Michiel F. Reneman (1) (2)
Monique H.W. Frings-Dresen (4)
P. Paul F. M Kuijer (4)
1. Center for Rehabilitation, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, 30.002, 9750 RA, Haren, The Netherlands
2. Groningen Spine Center, University of Groningen, University Medical Center Groningen, Groningen, The Netherlands
3. Expertise Center of Health, Social Care and Technology, Saxion Universities of Applied Sciences, Enschede, The Netherlands
4. Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands - ISSN：1573-3688
文摘
Purpose Application of normative values for functional capacity evaluation (FCE) is controversial for the assessment of clients for work ability. The objective of this study was to study when clinicians and researchers consider normative values of FCE useful or of no use for their purposes. Methods A focus group meeting was organized among 43 FCE experts working in insurance, occupational and/or rehabilitation medicine from eight countries during the first international FCE research meeting on October 25th, 2012 in the Netherlands. Participants were asked to rate to which degree they agree or disagree with a statement concerning their position toward normative values for FCE on a 10?cm VAS ranging from 0 (completely disagree) to 100 (completely agree) at T0 and T1. Arguments for aspects that are useful and of no use for normative values were systematically collected during the meeting and afterwards independently clustered by two researchers in higher order topics. Results Baseline opinion of participants on their position toward normative values was 49?±?29 points. After the meeting, mean VAS was 55?±?23 (p?=?0.07), indicating that participants did not significantly change their opinion toward normative values. Based on arguments provided by the experts, seven higher order topics were constructed namely ‘Comparison with job demands or treatment goals- ‘Comparison with co-workers physical ability- -a href='/search?dc.title=Sincerity&facet-content-type=ReferenceWorkEntry&sortOrder=relevance' class='reference-link webtrekk-track' gaCategory="Internal link" gaLabel="Sincerity" gaAction="reference keyword">Sincerity of effort- ‘Validity for work ability and return to work- ‘Experience of referrer with assessment method- ‘Clinimetrics compared to alternative assessment methods or reference values- and ‘Ease of use for clinician and stakeholders- Conclusions Although experts state useful aspects for the use of normative values of FCE for these assessments, it may also lead to over-interpretation of results, leading to dualistic statements concerning work ability, with potential harmful consequences for work ability of patients.