Impairment Rating Ambiguity in the United States: The Utah Impairment Guides for Calculating Workers' Compensation Impairments

Since the implementation of workers' compensation, accurately and consistently rating impairment has been a concern for the employee and employer, as well as rating physicians. In an attempt to standardize and classify impairments, the American Medical Association (AMA) publishes the AMA Guides ("Guides"), and recently published its 6th edition of the AMA Guides. Common critiques of the AMA Guides 6th edition are that they are too complex, lacking in evidence-based methods, and rarely yield consistent ratings. Many states mandate use of some edition of the AMA Guides, but few states are adopting the current edition due to the increasing difficulty and frustration with their implementation. A clearer, simpler approach is needed. Some states have begun to develop their own supplemental guides to combat problems in complexity and validity. Likewise studies in Korea show that past methods for rating impairment are outdated and inconsistent, and call for measures to adapt current methods to Korea's specific needs. The Utah Supplemental Guides to the AMA Guides have been effective in increasing consistency in rating impairment. It is estimated that litigation of permanent impairment has fallen below 1% and Utah is now one of the least costly states for obtaining workers' compensation insurance, while maintaining a medical fee schedule above the national average. Utah's guides serve as a model for national or international impairment guides.

Korean Guideline Development for the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment of the Spine: Proposal by the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences Committee

The criteria for the evaluation of spinal impairment are diverse, complex, and have no standardized form. This makes it difficult and somewhat troublesome to accurately evaluate spinal impairment patients. A standardized guideline was studied for the evaluation of spinal impairment, based on the American Medical Association (AMA) Guides and the McBride method. This guideline proposal was developed by specialty medical societies under the Korean Academy of Medical Sciences. In this study, the grades of impairment were assessed by dividing patients into three different categories: spinal cord impairment, spinal injury impairment and spinal disorder impairment. The affected regions of the spine are divided into three: the cervical region, the thoracic region, and the lumbosacral region. The grade of impairment was differentially evaluated according to the affected region. The restricted range of motion was excluded in the evaluation spinal impairment because of low objectivity. Even though the new Korean guideline for the evaluation of spinal impairment has been proposed, it should be continuously supplemented and revised.

A Comparative Study on Evaluation Methods of Permanent Impairment in Korea / 예방의학회지

In this study, literature review was done to examine and compare the current status and problems of different evaluation approaches toward permanent impairment in Korea. Alternatives and improvements in the current approaches in Korea were suggested. Series of cases were also examined to compare different approaches applied to the real cases, using 105 cases from a hospital data and another 207 cases from insurance company data. The main findings of the literature review are as follows; 1. The current evaluation methods of permanent impairment in Korea are grouped into two categories, grading and rating. Grading of impairments are expressly specified in 17 various statutes. 2. In Grading methods, the rigid system of 14 different grades has been adopted uniformally for the convenience of administration, which may not be, appropriate or valid from medical and scientifical aspect. 3. The advantage of McBride method is assessment of occupational disability rate. However the classified compensable occupations are only 280 and limited to manufacturing industries in 1960s' of U.S.A., which is not appropriate to current Korean circumstances. Especially, the job list does not include managerial officers or mental workers. 4. AMA Guides is the scientific and reasonable method for the assessment of physical impairment rate. However compensation and reparation of impairment case is difficult because this method cannot assess the disability rate according to occupation, age, etc. The results of cases comparative study are as follows: 5. The physical impairment could be compared in 167 out of total 312 cases and for the cases of complex impairment, McBride method underestimate physical impairment rate compared with AMA method. 6. When disability rate was assessed, occupation was considered the compensation of only 85 cases, and age was used in only 21 cases. This was because occupation and age compensation in McBride method are unreasonable. 7. The most ideal alternative is to assess physical impairment according to AMA method and then to develop a compensation method appropriate for the circumstances of Korea society.