the lower extremities ama g uides chapter 17table 17-2 • “typically, one method will adequately...
TRANSCRIPT
6/14/2016
1
THE LOWER EXTREMITIES
AMA GUIDES CHAPTER 17
Tim Mussack
Marlene Phillips
Bradford & Barthel, LLP
AMA Analysis and Ratings Division
Bradford & Barthel
AMA Analysis and Ratings Division
• Tim Mussack
(916) 569-0790
• Marlene Phillips
(909) 476-0552
http://www.bradfordbarthel.com/areas-of-practice/bb-ratings/rating-referral-form/
www.bradfordbarthel.com 2
6/14/2016
2
www.bradfordbarthel.com 3
Most Frequently Used Chapters• Chapters 1 & 2 --- The ‘Constitution’
– From page 17, in the Introduction to Chapter 2, the Practical Application of the Guides:
“Two physicians, following the methods of the Guides to evaluate the same patient, should report similar results and reach similar conclusions. Moreover, if the clinical findings are fully described, any knowledgeable observer may check the findings with the Guides criteria.”
• The Almaraz Guzman en banc decision of 9/3/2009:
“…by requiring use of the AMA Guides to determine impairment, the Legislature furthered its expressly stated goal of achieving “consistency, uniformity, and objectivity.”
• Chapter 15 --- Spine
• Chapter 16 --- Upper Extremity (UE)
• Chapter 17 --- Lower Extremity (LE)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 4
6/14/2016
3
The Lower Extremities
• Lower extremity impairment values
• Combining
– Impairment
– PD (after adjustment)
• Methods of Evaluation
www.bradfordbarthel.com 5
Chapter 17 – The Lower Extremitiesthere are errata
• 17.1 Principles of Assessment
(p. 524-525)
• 17.2 Methods of Assessment (p. 525-554)
• 17.3 LE Impairment Evaluation Procedure Summary and Examples (p. 555-560)
• Impairment evaluations are performed after the injured worker attains MMI
www.bradfordbarthel.com 6
6/14/2016
4
www.bradfordbarthel.com 7
‘Regional’ Impairment
• AMA Guides is not jurisdictionally specific for evaluating Permanent Disability
• The California Schedule for Rating gives additional instructions for rating Permanent Disabilities.
• Section 1 of the rating schedule is Introduction and Instructions.
From page 1-4:
• "The impairment number identifies the body part, organ system and/ or nature of the injury..."
• "Under Section 2 of the Permanent Disability Rating Schedule, an appropriate impairment number can be found for most impairments."
On page 1-5:
• "A single injury can result in multiple impairments of several parts of the body. For example, an injury to the arm could result in limited elbow range of motion and shoulder instability..."
On page 1-11 of the Schedule:
• "...'adjusting' refers to adjusting an AMA impairment rating for diminished future earning capacity, occupation, and age."
• "Impairments of an individual extremity are adjusted and combined at the whole person level with other impairments of the same extremity..."
8
6/14/2016
5
Impairment Values
• 100% LE = 40% WPI [LE % x .4 = WPI %]
– Table 17-3 – page 527
• 100% Foot = 70% LE [Foot % x .7 = LE %]
www.bradfordbarthel.com 9
Table 17-3 – page 527
Conversion Table – LE to WPI
www.bradfordbarthel.com 10
6/14/2016
6
Combine or Add, and CVC
• Numbers that are put together for evaluation of impairment/ PD must be either added or combined.
• When to combine:
• COMBINE – for most situations -- unless specific instructions state to ADD impairment values. The effect/ purpose of combining is that it prevents the combined value from exceeding 100.
A + B(1 – A) [where A and B are decimal equivalents]
• When to add:
• The most notable exception to combining impairments is with the evaluation of range of motion impairment for the same part of the body (for example, right ankle motion) [hand evaluation has unique methodology]
www.bradfordbarthel.com 11
Combine or Add, and CVC
• How to combine:
• Page 1-11 of the 2005 PDRS:
• Multiple impairments such as those involving a single part of an extremity, e.g. two impairment involving a shoulder such as shoulder instability and limited range of motion, are combined at the upper extremity level, then converted to whole person impairment and adjusted before being combined with other parts of the same extremity.
•• Impairments with disability numbers in the 16.01 and 17.01 series are converted
to whole person impairment and adjusted before being combined with any other impairment of the same extremity.
•• Impairments of an individual extremity are adjusted and combined at the whole
person [PD] level with other impairments of the same extremity before being combined with impairments of other body parts. For example, an impairment of the left knee and ankle would be combined before further combination with an impairment of the opposing leg or the back.
www.bradfordbarthel.com 12
6/14/2016
7
13www.bradfordbarthel.com
Chapter 17
• 13 Methods of Assessment
www.bradfordbarthel.com 14
6/14/2016
8
Methods Used to Evaluate
Impairments of the Lower Extremities
www.bradfordbarthel.com 15
Table 17-2, page 526
“After all potentially impairing conditions have been identified and correct ratings recorded …select the…most specific…method(s) and record the estimated impairment for each.”
“explain in writing why a particular method(s)…was chosen.”(p. 526)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 16
6/14/2016
9
Table 17-2
• “Typically, one method will adequately
characterize the impairment…”
• “Avoid combining methods that rate the
same condition.”
• “If more than one method can be used, the
method that provides the higher rating
should be adopted.” (page 527)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 17
www.bradfordbarthel.com 18
6/14/2016
10
Interpolation
• When a Table gives a range for objective
findings, and a correlating range for
impairment, use interpolation to provide the
appropriate value (as shown in Example 17-
15, with leg shortening)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 19
www.bradfordbarthel.com 20
Method #1
Limb Length Discrepancy
• X-rays strongly recommended
Repeat 3 times
3
“averaged to reduce measurement error”
P. 528
6/14/2016
11
www.bradfordbarthel.com 21
Table 17-4 (p. 528)Impairment Due to Limb Discrepancy
www.bradfordbarthel.com 22
Shortening due to:
• Overriding,
• Malalignment, or
• Fracture deformities
0-1.25 cm (0-1/2 in.) = 5% LE
1.25-2.5 cm (1/2-1 in.) = 10% LE
2.5-3.75 cm (1-1 ½ in.) = 15% LE
3.75-5.0 cm (1 ½ - 2 in.) = 20% LE
“combine…with other functional sequela…”
(p 528)
6/14/2016
12
www.bradfordbarthel.com 23
Method #2
Gait Derangement
• Why is it being used?
• Should use more specific method
• Correlating objective findings
• Read Table 17-5 (p. 529) carefully
• No combining
www.bradfordbarthel.com 24
Table 17-5, p. 529
•
6/14/2016
13
www.bradfordbarthel.com 25
• “Except as otherwise noted…Table 17-5 [is] for
full-time gait derangements of persons who
are dependent on assistive devices.”
• Not for “abnormalities based only on
subjective factors, such as pain or sudden
giving-way, as with…an individual with low-
back discomfort who chooses to use a cane to
assist in walking.”
www.bradfordbarthel.com 26
• “Whenever possible, the evaluator should use a more specific method. When the gait method is used, a written rationale should be included in the report. The lower limb impairment percents shown in Table 17-5 stand alone and are not combined with any other impairment evaluation method.”
• As also expressed in the Comment section for Example 17-1 on page 528 of the AMA Guides,
• “Although the individual has a limp (gait abnormality), gait derangement should be used only when no other method is available to rate the person.”
6/14/2016
14
www.bradfordbarthel.com 27
Method #3
Muscle Atrophy (Unilateral)
• At thigh 10 cm above patella
• Calf at “max level”
• Must compare measurement to opposite,
uninjured LE
• Combine thigh and calf atrophy
www.bradfordbarthel.com 28
Atrophy Measurements
• Compare measurement to opposite member
• Difference in circumference might be:
– Swelling
– Varicose veins
– Opposite member injured
6/14/2016
15
www.bradfordbarthel.com 29
Table 17-6 (p. 530)Impairment Due to Unilateral
Leg Muscle Atrophy
Mild
www.bradfordbarthel.com 30
Example
• Right tibia fracture
• MMI
• Pain free walking
• Right thigh atrophy = 2 cm
• Right calf atrophy = 1 cm
6/14/2016
16
www.bradfordbarthel.com 31
Impairment?
Thigh =
2 cm = 8% LE = 3% WPI
Calf =
1 cm = 3% LE = 1% WPI
Combine: 8% C 3% = 11 LE
Convert: 11% LE = 4% WPI
www.bradfordbarthel.com 32
Method #4
Manual Muscle Testing• Use Table 17-7 &17-8
(pages 531- 532)
• Note typo - Hip abduction,
Grade 3 = 37% LE
6/14/2016
17
www.bradfordbarthel.com 33
Table 17-7 (p. 531)
Criteria for Grades of Muscle Function
of the Lower Extremity
www.bradfordbarthel.com 34
Manual Muscle Testing (cont’d)Cautions – page 531:
“depends on the examinee’s cooperation”
“should be concordant with other…signs and medical evidence”
– More than one grade between examiners
– More than one grade from exam to exam
– Pain
– Fear of pain
– Attributed to deficit of a peripheral nerve
6/14/2016
18
www.bradfordbarthel.com 35
Table 17-8, p. 532Combine – Example 17-5
www.bradfordbarthel.com 36
Range of Motion
(pages 533-538)
Method #5
6/14/2016
19
www.bradfordbarthel.com 37
• Use ROM only “If it is clear…restricted [ROM]
has an organic basis…”
• Obtain 3 measurements; use greatest
• Add ROM impairments in joint
www.bradfordbarthel.com 38
Figure 17-1 (p. 534)Using a Goniometer to Measure Flexion of the Right Hip
6/14/2016
20
www.bradfordbarthel.com 39
Figure 17-2 (p. 534)Neutral Position, Abduction, Adduction
of the Right Hip
www.bradfordbarthel.com 40
Figure 17-3 (p. 535)Measuring Internal and External Hip Rotation
6/14/2016
21
www.bradfordbarthel.com 41
Figure 17- 4 (p. 535)Measuring Knee Flexion
www.bradfordbarthel.com 42
Figure 17-5 (p. 535)
6/14/2016
22
www.bradfordbarthel.com 43
Range of Motion (page 537)
• Table 17-9 - Hip
• Table 17-10 - Knee
• Table 17-11 - Ankle
• Table 17-12 - Hindfoot
• Table 17-13 - Ankle/Hindfoot
• Table 17-14 - Toes (see footnote)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 44
6/14/2016
23
www.bradfordbarthel.com 45
Example:
Ankle flexion of 6° = ?
= 6% WPI (15% LE) (Table 17-11, p. 537)
Ankle extension of 5° = ?
= 3% WPI (7% LE) (Table 17-11)
1 cm calf atrophy?
= 1% WPI (Table 17-6, p. 530)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 46
Impairment?
Add flexion + extension =
15% LE + 7% LE = 22% LE = 9% WPI
Do not use atrophy (1% WPI)
R: 1) Table 17-2 prohibits combining
2) ROM is more generous
6/14/2016
24
www.bradfordbarthel.com 47
Range of Motion (continued)
Invalid if:
• Class inconsistency between 2 observers
• Class inconsistency between exams
• Pain
• Fear of pain
www.bradfordbarthel.com 48
Method #6
Ankylosis (joint immobility)
See text for “optimal position” values
Hip = 50% LE = 20% WPI (p. 538)
Knee = 67% LE = 27% WPI (p. 540)
Ankle = 14% Foot = 10% LE = 4% WPI (p. 541)
Foot = 14% Foot = 10% LE = 4% WPI (p. 542)
Toes – see Table 17-30 (page 543)
6/14/2016
25
www.bradfordbarthel.com 49
Ankylosis (continued)
1. Determine value for “optimal position” (text)
2. Use Tables (pages 538-543) for deviation values
(malposition increases impairment)
3. Add multiple malpositions for same joint
4. Combine ankylosis of different joints
5. “The baseline rating for ankylosis in a neutral
position is used only once for each joint.”
www.bradfordbarthel.com 50
Body Part Motion Table Page
hip internal rot 17-16 539
hip ext rot 17-17 539
hip abd 17-18 539
hip add 17-19 539
knee varus 17-20 540
knee valgus 17-21 540
knee flex 17-22 540
knee int or ext 17-23 540
malrotation
6/14/2016
26
www.bradfordbarthel.com 51
Body Part Motion Table Page
ankle
plantar flex or dorsiflexion
17-24 541
ankle varus 17-25 541
ankle valgus 17-26 541
ankleint malrotation
17-27 541
ankleext malrotation
17-28 541
ankletibia-os calcis angle
17-29 542
toes ankylosis 17-30 543
www.bradfordbarthel.com 52
Method #7
Arthritis
6/14/2016
27
www.bradfordbarthel.com 53
Arthritis (cont’d)
• Use x-rays (“standing if possible”) with Table
17-31 (page 544)
• ( ) = normal cartilage intervals
• Compare uninjured opposite member
www.bradfordbarthel.com 54
Table 17-31, p. 544
6/14/2016
28
www.bradfordbarthel.com 55
Arthritis (cont’d)
Table 17-31 Footnote:
if (i) direct trauma; (ii) patellofemoral pain (between knee cap and thigh bone/femur), and (iii) “crepitation” on physical exam; (iv) no joint space narrowing
- 2% WPI (5% LE)
• The knee has a medial and lateral compartment – only the more significant loss is used
(can be combined with patellofemoral arthritis)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 56
Example
• Right tibia fracture 10 years ago
• Over years, increase knee pain, occasional
swelling
• Standing x-ray – 2 mm cartilage interval
6/14/2016
29
www.bradfordbarthel.com 57
Impairment?
Cartilage interval (knee) = 2 mm
Table?
Table 17-31 (p. 544)
Likely amount of cartilage loss?
“normal” = 4 mm
WPI?
8% WPI (20% LE)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 58
Method #8
Amputations
• See Table 17-32 (page 545)
6/14/2016
30
www.bradfordbarthel.com 59
Table 17-32, p. 545
www.bradfordbarthel.com 60
Method #9
Diagnoses-Based Estimates – Table 17-33(used in 70-80% of LE cases)
Covers 9 regions/conditions1) Pelvis
2) Hip
3) Femoral Shaft Fracture
4) Knee
5) Malalignment of Tibial Shaft Fracture
6) Ankle
7) Hindfoot
8) Midfoot Deformity
9) Forefoot Deformity
6/14/2016
31
www.bradfordbarthel.com 61
www.bradfordbarthel.com 62
6/14/2016
32
www.bradfordbarthel.com 63
Hip and Knee Replacements require
the use of 2 TablesHip Replacement:
Table 17-34 and 17-33 (p. 548, 546-547)
Knee Replacement:
Table 17-35 and 17-33 (p. 549, 546-547)
All others:
Table 17-33 (p. 546-547)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 64
DRE Hip Replacement
• Add points from Categories a-e (Table 17-34,
p. 548)
– Note that the primary factor is pain
• Apply to Table 17-33 (p. 546)
(Good, Fair, Poor Results)
6/14/2016
33
www.bradfordbarthel.com 65
Table 17-34, p. 548
www.bradfordbarthel.com 66
Table 17-35, p. 549
•
6/14/2016
34
www.bradfordbarthel.com 67
Total Hip and/ or Knee Replacement
• Good Results, 85-100 pts. 15(37)
• Fair Results, 50-84 pts. 20(50)
• Poor Results, less than 50 pts. 30(75)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 68
Method #10
Skin Loss(p. 550)
6/14/2016
35
www.bradfordbarthel.com 69
Use Table 17-36 (p. 550)
Full-thickness skin loss: impairment “even when the areas are successfully covered with [a]…skin graft.”
Chronic osteomyelitis (bone infection*) too
* Usually a bacterial infection of bone/marrow. Resulting inflammation can lead to reduction of blood supply to bone.
www.bradfordbarthel.com 70
Table 17-36 (p. 550)
6/14/2016
36
www.bradfordbarthel.com 71
Method #11
Peripheral Nerve Injuries(p. 550-552)
Table 17-37 - maximum impairment values
Assessed sensory/ motor deficits are applied
Combine with other LE methods except:muscle weaknessatrophygait (p. 552)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 72
Dysesthesia
• Impairment of sensitivity, especially to touch.
Altered feelings, such as burning, wetness,
electric shock, pins and needles, itching
(p. 600)
6/14/2016
37
www.bradfordbarthel.com 73
Table 17-37 (p. 552)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 74
Method #12
Causalgia & CRPS(p. 553)
6/14/2016
38
www.bradfordbarthel.com 75
CRPS I (RSD)
CRPS II (causalgia)
“characterized by pain, swelling, stiffness,
discoloration…skeletal demineralization”
“may follow a sprain, fracture or nerve or
vascular injury”
www.bradfordbarthel.com 76
CRPS I (RSD)
CRPS II (causalgia)
Use Chapter 13 (“Central & Peripheral Nervous
System”):
Section 13.8 (p. 343-344)
Section 13.5 (p. 336)
6/14/2016
39
www.bradfordbarthel.com 77
“to rate [causalgia and RSD]…, diagnosis is
key…”
• Diagnosis: rely on clinical findings, three-
phase bone scan, x-rays, laser Doppler
flowmetry, sudomotor reflex
• Table 16-16 (p. 496)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 78
Table 13-15 (p. 336)
6/14/2016
40
www.bradfordbarthel.com 79
Method #13
Vascular Disorders(p. 553-554)
www.bradfordbarthel.com 80
Table 17-38, p. 554)
6/14/2016
41
www.bradfordbarthel.com 81
• Intermittent claudication: cramping or aching in the calves (sometimes the thighs or buttocks) caused by walking; relieved by rest; a manifestation of atherosclerosis (blockage of an artery). It is called “intermittent” because of the pattern of pain only with walking.
• Edema: abnormal buildup of fluid in the ankles, feet and legs.
• Common causes:
– Prolonged standing
– Long airplane flights or automobile rides
– Menstrual periods (for some women)
– Pregnancy
– Being overweight
– Increased age
– Injury or trauma
Summary
• Multiple potential methods for impairment
evaluation
• Some can be combined; others cannot
• Combine impairments at the LE impairment
level before converting to WPI
• Cautions regarding the use of Gait
Derangement; Strength evaluation
www.bradfordbarthel.com 82
6/14/2016
42
Almaraz/ Guzman
• Almaraz/ Guzman rating not automatic
• Must be substantial evidence
• Within four corners of AMA Guides
• Physician rationale required
2015 DWC Educational Conference
Evidence and reasoning
www.bradfordbarthel.com 83
Tim Mussack
(916) 569-0790 [email protected]
Marlene Phillips
(909) [email protected]
www.bradfordbarthel.com 84