1 / 31

Functional Capacity Evaluation

Functional Capacity Evaluation. Are they worth their weight?? Peg Hau OT/CHT Advanced Physical Therapy & Sports Medicine.

peter-gibson
Download Presentation

Functional Capacity Evaluation

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Functional Capacity Evaluation Are they worth their weight?? Peg Hau OT/CHT Advanced Physical Therapy & Sports Medicine

  2. In developing diagnostic tests, we must remember that it is better to miss an insincere individual than to classify a sincere patient as insincere. Tests must be chosen carefully, and if multiple tests are used, they must be administered in a logical order. • Ahmer, 2007

  3. History of the FCE • A functional capacity evaluation is set of tests, practices and observations that are combined to determine the ability of the evaluated to function in a variety of circumstances, most often employment, in an objective manner • 1970’s beginning • 2001critized as not being job specific Reneman et al, 2001

  4. What is an FCE • Evaluates and individuals ability to perform work ax’s related to his/her employment • Similar types of testing • Consists of standardized assessments • Administered with care and safety in mind (Kuijer et al., 2011; Soer, et al., 2008).

  5. Why are they ordered • Baseline • Pre employment • Job Specific • Medical/legal • Assisting with case closure

  6. Who can benefit from an FCE • Individual injured on the job • Applying for Social Security Disability • Seeking to return to work after extended leave • Someone seeking vocational rehabilitation • Transition from school to work setting

  7. FCEs are done on a one-on-one basis and may range in length from 4 to 6 hours. • The FCE may take place over 2 consecutive days.

  8. Components of an FCE • History review – medical, vocational, social • Screening tests – musculoskeletal • Physical functional testing – based on DOT • Job simulation – when identified job is known • Behavior assessment • Results, data compilation, and recommendations

  9. Types of FCE’s • Matheson • Ergo Science www.ergoscience.com • ARCON FCE http://fcesoftware.com/home.html • Isernhagen Work System • Blankenship • Ergos Work Simuolator and Ergo Kit Variation • Hanoun Medical • WEST-EPIC • Key • AssessAbility

  10. Ergo Science • Developed in 1988 by Deborah Lechner PT,MS • Administrators must complete 24 hours of instruction • Used in 850 clinics • www.ergoscience.com

  11. ARCON Science • www.fcesoftware.com • 30 years of development and refinement.  • 1,000 clinics nation wide

  12. ARCON continued • The Arcon system includes:* Computerized hand and pinch gauges.* Electronic goniometer.* Dual range of motion inclinometers.* Dynamic and isometric lifting system.* Carpal tunnel testing attachment.* Computerized heart rate monitor.Testing protocols includes:* Dynamic lifting.* Isometric testing extremities & back.* Range of motion testing.* Dexterity testing.* Endurance testing.* Activities of daily living.

  13. Iserhagen Work System • Susan J. Isernhagen PT created the first functional capacity evaluation in the mid 1980’s. • Redeveloped in 2004 • Objectivity of results to replace the subjective estimates that were currently being used • Medical base to tie the functional capacity and limitations into current diagnoses • Information on level of effort, to identify those who used full effort and those who did not use full effort. • Safety in functional tests so that this information could lead to safe return to work • Work relatedness to determine abilities to perform specific jobs, • http://dsiworksolutions.com/history.htm

  14. Iserhagen continued • The Relevance for Nondiscrimination Compliance by Susan Iserhagen - 2010

  15. Blankenship • Aunique FCE • called the WORKEVALTM and it helps Physicians, Case Managers and Employers determine what work limitations are appropriate for the injured worker. • We also provide Physicians with the objective data they need to determine the injured worker's Permanent and Partial Disability, or PPD.  The name for • this evaluation, which was developed and published by the American Medical Association, is a Permanent Impairment Evaluation.  This evaluation process determines the percent of Permanent, Partial Impairment and that percentage • is used to help Patients, Employers, Insurers and Attorneys negotiate the settlement of the Workers' Compensation Case.

  16. Ergos Work Simulator

  17. Hanoun Medical • Strength & dexterity testing • Protocols • Fatigue analsyis software • ????????????

  18. Assessability • http://www.assessability.net/fme-vs-fce.html • Functional Medicine Evaluation (FME) vs. Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE)

  19. Key • Glenda KeyFounder and President • 1987 • 300 clinics & 42 states • Double blind testing

  20. Physical Examination • Heart rate and blood pressure • Posture and gait • Range of motion • Strength • Balance • Other special testing as warranted

  21. Functional Testing continued: • Sustained overhead activity • Climbing ladders • Crouching/squatting/ stooping

  22. Functional testing • Floor to waist/ shoulder/overhead lift • Carrying • Push/pull

  23. Functional Testing cont: • Grip strength • Pinch strength • FMC/9 hole peg/Purdue • Stereognosis

  24. Less than Full Effort Performance • Reasons for …….. • 1. Medically determined impairments • 2. Malingering • 3. Factitious disorder • 4. Learned illness behavior • 5. Conversion disorder, pain disorder Matheson, 2003

  25. Continued: • 6. Depressive disorder • 7. Test anxiety • 8. Fear of symptom exacerbation or injury • 9. Fatigue • 10. Medication & psychoactive substance effects • 11. Lowered self-efficacy expectations • 12. Need to gain recognition for symptoms

  26. Methods to identify inconsistancy • Intra test inconsistency • Absence of expected relationships among measures. • Completion of tests and willingness to do more • Coefficient of variation • Rapid exchange grip • Correlation of heart rate with reported max effort • Correlation of impairment (range of motion, manual muscle tests, etc. ) to function

  27. Non-Organic Signs • Pain Questionaire • Waddell • McGill Pain Questionaire • Ransford • Numeric pain scale • Million Visual Analogue

  28. Million Visual Analogue Scale • The Million visual analogue scale • The Million visual analogue scale (MVAS) (Table 15) is a 15-item questionnaire about disability and pain intensity in patients with LBP.38The 15 questions investigate the body functions (pain, sleep, stiffness and twisting), daily activities (walking, sitting, standing and work) and social life. Information about item selection process is not available. Score is given on a 100 mm visual analogue scale(VAS). For example, if patients are asked to quantify the severity of his pain (like the first question), they mark a point on a 100-mm line in which the end points are labelled as ‘no pain’ and ‘intolerable’. In each question, it is possible to obtain an index of severity of symptoms in a patient-specific fashion measuring the distance of the marked point from the origin of the line. The final score is calculated by adding up the equally weighted scores.

  29. Physical Demand Characteristics of Work

  30. References • Chapman-Day, K. M., Matheson, L. N., Schimanski, D., Leicht, J., & DeVries, L. (2011). Preparing difficult clients to return to work. Work (Reading, Mass.), 40(4), 359-367. doi:10.3233/WOR-2011-1247; 10.3233/WOR-2011-1247 • Gouttebarge, V., Kuijer, P. P., Wind, H., van Duivenbooden, C., Sluiter, J. K., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. (2009). Criterion-related validity of functional capacity evaluation lifting tests on future work disability risk and return to work in the construction industry. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 66(10), 657-663. doi:10.1136/oem.2008.042903; 10.1136/oem.2008.042903 • Gouttebarge, V., Wind, H., Kuijer, P. P., Sluiter, J. K., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. (2010). How to assess physical work-ability with functional capacity evaluation methods in a more specific and efficient way? Work (Reading, Mass.), 37(1), 111-115. doi:10.3233/WOR-2010-1084; 10.3233/WOR-2010-1084 • Streibelt, M., Blume, C., Thren, K., Reneman, M. F., & Mueller-Fahrnow, W. (2009). Value of functional capacity evaluation information in a clinical setting for predicting return to work. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 90(3), 429-434. doi:http://dx.doi.org.ezproxy2.library.drexel.edu/10.1016/j.apmr.2008.08.218 • Westbrook, A. P., Tredgett, M. W., Davis, T. R., & Oni, J. A. (2002). The rapid exchange grip strength test and the detection of submaximal grip effort. The Journal of Hand Surgery, 27(2), 329-333. • Wind, H., Gouttebarge, V., Kuijer, P. P., Sluiter, J. K., & Frings-Dresen, M. H. (2009). Effect of functional capacity evaluation information on the judgment of physicians about physical work ability in the context of disability claims. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 82(9), 1087-1096. doi:10.1007/s00420-009-0423-8; 10.1007/s00420-009-0423-8

More Related