Author:
Melhorn J. Mark,Gelinas Barry,Martin Douglas W.,Hegmann Kurt T.,Thiese Matthew S.
Abstract
Objective
Describe and evaluate methodological improvements in AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (Guides) Sixth Edition 2024, including an updated sequential method and enhanced diagnosis-based impairment tables, compared to the Guides Sixth 2008.
Methods
Three physician experts and 3 premedical students, respectively, completed 2 rounds of impairment ratings using the AMA Guides Sixth 2008 versus 2024 methods. Impairment values and completion times using each method were compared for both groups.
Results
Time to complete an impairment rating by experts averaged 3.5 minutes using Guides 2024 compared with 13.9 minutes using Guides 2008, with 100% accuracy and reliability for both. Students' time averaged 5.3 and 15.9 minutes, respectively, with increased accuracy and reliability with Guides 2024.
Conclusions
The Guides Sixth 2024 allowed more efficient impairment ratings while retaining accuracy, consistency, reliability, and reproducibility.
Publisher
Ovid Technologies (Wolters Kluwer Health)
Reference14 articles.
1. Correlation between the measures of impairment, according to the modified system of the American Medical Association, and function;J Bone Joint Surg Am,1999
2. International Use of the AMA Guides® to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment;Guides Newsletter,2020
3. Impairment rating ambiguity in the United States: the Utah Impairment Guides for calculating workers' compensation impairments;J Korean Med Sci,2009
4. AMA Guides 6th Edition: new concepts, challenges, and opportunities;IAIABC J Guides,2008
5. Reliability of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment;J Occup Environ Med,2010