scholarly journals Workers’ Compensation Status Confers a Greater Number of Postoperative Visits After Common Upper Extremity Surgeries

Cureus ◽  
2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tyler W Henry ◽  
Clay B Townsend ◽  
Pedro K Beredjiklian
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Status

Workers' Compensation and Outcomes of Upper Extremity Surgery

2013 ◽  
Vol 21 (2) ◽  
pp. 67-77 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. I. Gruson ◽  
K. Huang ◽  
T. Wanich ◽  
A. A. DePalma
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Workers Compensation

The Effect of Workers’ Compensation Status on Outcomes of Cervical Disc Arthroplasty

2016 ◽  
Vol 98 (2) ◽  
pp. 93-99 ◽  
Author(s):  
Matthew F. Gornet ◽  
Francine W. Schranck ◽  
Anne G. Copay ◽  
Branko Kopjar
Keyword(s):  
Cervical Disc ◽  
Cervical Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Disc Arthroplasty ◽  
Compensation Status

Identifying cumulative trauma disorders of the upper extremity in workers' compensation databases

2003 ◽  
Vol 43 (5) ◽  
pp. 507-518 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dianne Zakaria ◽  
Cam Mustard ◽  
James Robertson ◽  
Joy C. MacDermid ◽  
Kathleen Hartford ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Cumulative Trauma Disorders ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Cumulative Trauma ◽  
Trauma Disorders

scholarly journals Correction: Workers’ Compensation Status: Does It Affect Orthopaedic Surgery Outcomes? A Meta-Analysis

PLoS ONE ◽  
2013 ◽  
Vol 8 (8) ◽  
Author(s):  
Vinícius Ynoe de Moraes ◽  
Katelyn Godin ◽  
Marcel Jun Sugawara Tamaoki ◽  
Flávio Faloppa ◽  
Mohit Bhandari ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Orthopaedic Surgery ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Compensation Status ◽  
Surgery Outcomes

Erroneous Impairment Ratings Companion: Impairment Rating Critique and the Longshore and Harbor Workers’ Compensation Act

2006 ◽  
Vol 11 (4) ◽  
pp. 10-11
Author(s):  
Craig Uejo ◽  
Phil Walker
Keyword(s):  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Administrative Law ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Department Of Labor ◽  
The Us ◽  
Expert’S Opinion ◽  
Impairment Ratings ◽  
Board Decision ◽  
Upper Extremity Impairment ◽  
Expert Physician

Abstract A 2005 Benefits Review Board decision by the US Department of Labor, Peter J. Desjardins vs Bath Iron Works Corporation affirmed a decision and order (2004-LHC-1364) regarding the utility of impairment rating critique. The administrative law judge credited the rating opinion of an expert physician reviewer (who had not seen the claimant) over that of the treating physician. The claimant's physician was awarded 20% upper extremity impairment, but, following the review and opinion of an expert reviewer, the award was reduced to 4%. The claimant appealed, largely on the argument that the expert reviewer had reviewed the report by the patient's physician, not the claimant himself and that the expert's opinion properly relied on the correct use of the AMA Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment (AMA Guides). The appeals judges noted that the administrative judge properly noted that the AMA Guides was suitable for use (and was the basis of the treating physician's award). The administrative law judge found that the expert reviewer's opinion was based on the specifics of the present case and on his knowledge and application of the AMA Guides, which together warranted determinative weight, based on the expert reviewer's credentials, experience, and well-reasoned opinion. This decision confirms that expert reviewers can provide evidence for the fact finder to evaluate the treating physician's opinion to determine if it is well reasoned and documented.

Evaluation of multiple level nerve compression

1996 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 1-5 ◽  
Author(s):  
Meral Omurtag ◽  
Christine B Novak ◽  
Susan E Mackinnon
Keyword(s):  
Retrospective Study ◽  
Carpal Tunnel Syndrome ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Carpal Tunnel ◽  
Nerve Compression ◽  
Cubital Tunnel ◽  
Workers Compensation ◽  
Multiple Level ◽  
Tunnel Syndrome

In this retrospective study, the charts of 100 patients (81 females and 19 males, mean age 41 years) with a diagnosis of multiple level nerve compression were reviewed. Forty-five patients were involved with Workers' Compensation. The most common referral diagnosis was carpal tunnel syndrome (43%); only one patient was referred with the diagnosis of ‘multiple crush’. Of the 43 patients referred with a diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome, 35% had two levels of nerve compression (carpal and cubital tunnel or carpal tunnel and thoracic outlet) and 65% had three levels of nerve compression (carpal tunnel, cubital tunnel and thoracic outlet). This study suggests that multiple level nerve compression is frequently unrecognized and recommends full upper extremity evaluation, especially in patients referred with a diagnosis of carpal tunnel syndrome, to identify all levels of nerve compression.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document