Chapter 1. Fair play to them

2012 ◽  
pp. 27-42 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian MacKenzie
Keyword(s):  
Fair Play

Quick Reference: Chapter 1: The Musculoskeletal System: The Hand and Upper Extremity

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (5) ◽  
pp. 4-5
Keyword(s):  
Dorsal Column ◽  
Persistent Pain ◽  
Illness Behavior ◽  
Abnormal Illness Behavior ◽  
Organ Systems ◽  
Spinal Cord Dorsal ◽  
Objective Basis ◽  
Dorsal Column Stimulation ◽  
Underlying Pathology

Abstract Spinal cord (dorsal column) stimulation (SCS) and intraspinal opioids (ISO) are treatments for patients in whom abnormal illness behavior is absent but who have an objective basis for severe, persistent pain that has not been adequately relieved by other interventions. Usually, physicians prescribe these treatments in cancer pain or noncancer-related neuropathic pain settings. A survey of academic centers showed that 87% of responding centers use SCS and 84% use ISO. These treatments are performed frequently in nonacademic settings, so evaluators likely will encounter patients who were treated with SCS and ISO. Does SCS or ISO change the impairment associated with the underlying conditions for which these treatments are performed? Although the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides) does not specifically address this question, the answer follows directly from the principles on which the AMA Guides impairment rating methodology is based. Specifically, “the impairment percents shown in the chapters that consider the various organ systems make allowance for the pain that may accompany the impairing condition.” Thus, impairment is neither increased due to persistent pain nor is it decreased in the absence of pain. In summary, in the absence of complications, the evaluator should rate the underlying pathology or injury without making an adjustment in the impairment for SCS or ISO.

Fifth Edition: the New Standard

2000 ◽  
Vol 5 (6) ◽  
pp. 1-7
Author(s):  
Christopher R. Brigham ◽  
James B. Talmage ◽  
Leon H. Ensalada
Keyword(s):  
Musculoskeletal System ◽  
Medical Information ◽  
Objective Assessment ◽  
Scientific Data ◽  
Practical Application ◽  
Fourth Edition ◽  
Appropriate Use ◽  
Medical Evaluation ◽  
Single Set

Abstract The AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides), Fifth Edition, is available and includes numerous changes that will affect both evaluators who and systems that use the AMA Guides. The Fifth Edition is nearly twice the size of its predecessor (613 pages vs 339 pages) and contains three additional chapters (the musculoskeletal system now is split into three chapters and the cardiovascular system into two). Table 1 shows how chapters in the Fifth Edition were reorganized from the Fourth Edition. In addition, each of the chapters is presented in a consistent format, as shown in Table 2. This article and subsequent issues of The Guides Newsletter will examine these changes, and the present discussion focuses on major revisions, particularly those in the first two chapters. (See Table 3 for a summary of the revisions to the musculoskeletal and pain chapters.) Chapter 1, Philosophy, Purpose, and Appropriate Use of the AMA Guides, emphasizes objective assessment necessitating a medical evaluation. Most impairment percentages in the Fifth Edition are unchanged from the Fourth because the majority of ratings currently are accepted, there is limited scientific data to support changes, and ratings should not be changed arbitrarily. Chapter 2, Practical Application of the AMA Guides, describes how to use the AMA Guides for consistent and reliable acquisition, analysis, communication, and utilization of medical information through a single set of standards.

Ownership without Legitimacy?

2008 ◽  
pp. 85-105 ◽  
Author(s):  
R. Kapeliushnikov
Keyword(s):  
Economic Growth ◽  
Critical Appraisal ◽  
Birth Trauma ◽  
Fair Play ◽  
Different Types

The paper examines the problem of legitimation of the privatization’s outcomes in Russia and provides a critical appraisal of various political proposals for its resolution. The analysis proceeds from a distinction between two different types of ownership illegitimacy: "definite" and "vague" ones. The paper argues that the "vague" illegitimacy that has evolved in Russia is not an absolute obstacle for economic growth but rather an institutional birth trauma which is common for all post-socialist countries and which could be cured only by piecemeal approaching of relationships between "strong" and "weak" economic actors to principles of fair play.

Is economic inequality a universal evil?

2019 ◽  
pp. 91-106 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rostislav I. Kapeliushnikov
Keyword(s):  
Quantitative Data ◽  
Large Scale ◽  
Economic Inequality ◽  
The State ◽  
Fair Play ◽  
Left Wing ◽  
Ordinary People ◽  
The Public ◽  
Discursive Power ◽  
A Current

Using published estimates of inequality for two countries (Russia and USA) the paper demonstrates that inequality measuring still remains in the state of “statistical cacophony”. Under this condition, it seems at least untimely to pass categorical normative judgments and offer radical political advice for governments. Moreover, the mere practice to draw normative conclusions from quantitative data is ethically invalid since ordinary people (non-intellectuals) tend to evaluate wealth and incomes as admissible or inadmissible not on the basis of their size but basing on whether they were obtained under observance or violations of the rules of “fair play”. The paper concludes that a current large-scale ideological campaign of “struggle against inequality” has been unleashed by left-wing intellectuals in order to strengthen even more their discursive power over the public.

Chapter 1

2019 ◽  
Author(s):  
Servicio Geológico Colombiano SGC
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document