Recommendations to guide revision of the Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment. American Medical Association.

The American Medical Association's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, Fourth Edition, is the most commonly used tool in the United States for rating permanent impairments for disability systems. The Guides, currently undergoing revision, has been the focus of considerable controversy. Criticisms have focused on 2 areas: internal deficiencies, including the lack of a comprehensive, valid, reliable, unbiased, and evidence-based system for rating impairments; and the way in which workers' compensation systems use the ratings, resulting in inappropriate compensation. We focus on the internal deficiencies and recommend that the Guides remains a tool for evaluation of permanent impairment, not disability. To maintain wide acceptance of the Guides, its authors need to improve the validity, internal consistency, and comprehensiveness of the ratings; document reliability and reproducibility of the results; and make the Guides easily comprehensible and accessible to physicians.

The effort to rehabilitate workers' compensation.

State workers' compensation laws have been subjected to criticism since their inception; pressure to change them is now increasing. Most of the current challenge arise from dissatisfaction with the level of benefits available to disabled workers or their survivors, and, to a lesser degree, with the extent of program coverage. In response to this challenge, changes will occur that my range from reform-simply raising benefit levels and extending coverage-to program redesign, implying major structural revisions or abolishment of the system. For several reasons, including public apathy, the role of interest groups, and experience with other social insurance programs, it seems likely that basic structural shifts will not occur in the near future. While the criticism of these state laws is widespread, the problems can be dealt with in the existing framework. One area, however, could conceivably arouse sufficient public and legislative interest to upset this forecast. If it develops that the system is excluding large numbers of individuals disabled or killed by occupational diseases, workers' compensation laws could be placed in jeopardy. While evidence on this is scarce, it is clear that the current system compensates only a small number of serious cases of disability arising from occupational diseases.