Wind Haije, Gouttebarge Vincent, Kuijer P Paul F M, Sluiter Judith K, Frings-Dresen Monique H W
Coronel Institute of Occupational Health, Academic Medical Center, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Int Arch Occup Environ Health. 2009 Mar;82(4):435-43. doi: 10.1007/s00420-008-0361-x. Epub 2008 Oct 9.
To study the complementary value of information from functional capacity evaluation (FCE) for insurance physicians (IPs) who assess the physical work ability of claimants with long-term musculoskeletal disorders (MSD).
A post-test only design was used in the context of disability claims. Twenty-eight IPs participated in the study. Claimants with MSD formed the patient population. For each IP, the first claimant who agreed to participate was included in the study, and underwent FCE in addition to the regular disability claim assessment. Firstly, the IP performed the statutory disability claim assessment. Secondly, the FCE assessment took place. Finally, a self-formulated questionnaire was presented to the IPs after they viewed the FCE report. IPs were asked whether they perceived FCE information to be of complementary value to their judgment of the claimant's physical work ability investigated. We considered FCE information to be of complementary value if more than 66% of the IPs indicated as such. IPs were also asked whether FCE information led them to change their initial judgment about the claimant's physical work ability, and whether they felt this information made them more confident about their ultimate judgement. Finally, they were asked whether they planned to include FCE information in future disability claims and for what type of claimants. Differences between IPs who did or did not experience complementary value were explored.
Of the 28, 19 (nearly 68%) IPs considered FCE information to be of complementary value for their assessment of claimants with MSD. Half of the IPs stated that FCE information reinforced their judgment. All but four IPs changed their assessment after reading the FCE report. Sixteen IPs intended to involve FCE information in future disability claim assessments. There were no observed differences between the IPs who did or did not consider the FCE information to be of complementary value.
FCE information was found to have complementary value at present and in the future according to most IPs in the assessment of the physical work ability of claimants with MSD. Half of the IPs felt that this information reinforces their judgment in this context.
研究功能能力评估（FCE）信息对评估长期肌肉骨骼疾病（MSD）索赔人的身体工作能力的保险医师（IP）的补充价值。
在残疾索赔背景下采用仅后测设计。28名IP参与了研究。患有MSD的索赔人构成了患者群体。对于每位IP，同意参与的第一位索赔人被纳入研究，并在常规残疾索赔评估之外还接受了FCE。首先，IP进行法定残疾索赔评估。其次，进行FCE评估。最后，在IP查看FCE报告后向他们提供一份自行编制的问卷。询问IP他们是否认为FCE信息对他们对索赔人的身体工作能力的判断具有补充价值。如果超过66%的IP表示是这样，我们就认为FCE信息具有补充价值。还询问IP FCE信息是否导致他们改变对索赔人的身体工作能力的初始判断，以及他们是否觉得该信息使他们对最终判断更有信心。最后，询问他们是否计划在未来的残疾索赔中纳入FCE信息以及针对何种类型的索赔人。探讨了体验到或未体验到补充价值的IP之间的差异。
在28名IP中，19名（近68%）认为FCE信息对他们评估患有MSD的索赔人具有补充价值。一半的IP表示FCE信息强化了他们的判断。除了4名IP外，所有IP在阅读FCE报告后都改变了他们的评估。16名IP打算在未来的残疾索赔评估中纳入FCE信息。在认为或不认为FCE信息具有补充价值的IP之间未观察到差异。
根据大多数IP的看法，FCE信息在目前和未来对评估患有MSD的索赔人的身体工作能力具有补充价值。一半的IP认为在此背景下该信息强化了他们的判断。
