PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

L N Matheson

Publications and source records attributed to L N Matheson.

12 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2001

Development of the Functional Assessment Taxonomy.

The development of the Functional Assessment Taxonomy is described and the taxonomy is presented. The taxonomy provides a method to classify and organize constructs that are used to assess the functional abilities of people with medical impairments to determine work disability. The taxonomy has 131 constructs that are organized into 33 conceptual factors that are nested in 5 domains. Each construct is defined and is categorized in terms of the work disability model and the unit of analysis that is commonly used to measure the construct. The use of the taxonomy in the Disability Methodology Redesign Project is described. Other possible uses for the taxonomy are presented.

Classification↗
PubMed2001

Disability methodology redesign: considerations for a new approach to disability determination.

Disability determination meets important societal needs, involving billions of dollars and millions of people every year. However, disability determination decisions often are incorrect, and the high proportion of decision appeals and reversals creates additional administrative expense and difficulty for the people that the disability determination system is intended to support. Projects funded by the United States Social Security Administration explored these issues and developed new conceptual models and tools to improve the accuracy and fairness of disability determination. This paper provides an introduction to the projects and the papers in this special issue of the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation.

Disability Evaluation↗
PubMed2001

Development of new methods to determine work disability in the United States.

The development of new methods to determine work disability for the United States Social Security Administration is described, including the fiscal and administrative background to the current and proposed methods. An introduction to the current disability determination process and description of its status is followed by a description of the original proposed plan for redesign of the process. In response to this plan, the authors participated in several research projects. An overview of some of the key research projects performed to improve the Social Security Administration disability determination process is provided.

Humans↗
PubMed2001

Development of a database of functional assessment measures related to work disability.

The development of the Functional Assessment Measures Database is described. The database provides a method to organize and search for measures that are used to assess the functional abilities of people with medical impairments to determine work disability. The project identified 4,200 different measures that are used in the functional assessment of persons with disability across the life span, 812 of which are used to evaluate adults in terms of work disability. The database has 3,033 scales that are found in 633 measures. In the database, each measure is described and is linked to at least one functional assessment construct. The use of the database in the Social Security Administration Redesign Project is described. Other possible uses for the database are presented.

Databases, Factual↗
PubMed2001

Development and construct validation of the Hand Function Sort.

The construct validity of the Hand Function Sort (HFS) was investigated in 126 adults of working age (65% male) with medical impairments. Principal components factor analysis identified one major factor and two minor factors, which was consistent with the findings of a subsequent Harris Image Analysis. A Kaiser Image Analysis identified seven factors, partitioning the first global factor. Construct validity also was studied. HFS scores of subjects who had impairment of the dominant upper extremity were compared with subjects whose dominant upper extremities were not impaired. Significant differences were found between groups for total scores and in categories of tasks for which hand dominance was likely to be important. Conversely, there were no significant differences with tasks for which hand dominance was not important. HFS scores were compared with grip strength, which accounted for significant variance in the total HFS score. When categories of tasks were considered, substantial variance in the factors for which grip strength was important was accounted for by grip strength. For tasks in which grip strength was not likely to be important, variance accounted for by grip strength was negligible.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1999

Restorative exercise for clinical low back pain. A prospective two-center study with 1-year follow-up.

STUDY DESIGN: A comparison of treatment of 412 patients with chronic back pain at two separate centers using the same treatment protocols and outcome measures. Outcome was defined by specific strength testing; Short Form-36 scores at intake, discharge, and 1-year follow-up; self-appraisal of improvement at discharge and in a 1-year follow-up; and reuse of health care services after discharge. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the efficacy of standardized treatment methods using isolated lumbar strength testing and strengthening based on progressive protocols using specific equipment. Comparison of results should clarify the effect of the treatment center versus the efficacy of standardized protocols. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There has been little support in the scientific literature for exercise programs based on standardized protocols. The use of specialized equipment to achieve intense specific exercise also has been poorly supported. Overall health benefit has not often been related to specific improvement in strength. METHODS: More than 400 individuals with chronic back pain were evaluated at the initiation of treatment, discharge, and 1 year after discharge. Measures of efficacy were based on Short Form-36 scores, self-appraisal of improvement, and reuse of health care services after discharge. Study participants were patients with chronic back pain consecutively referred to each treatment site and underwritten by a variety of payers, including workers' compensation, Medicare, and private insurance. RESULTS: Overall response during the course of the program and at 1-year follow-up was similar between the two centers. Similar proportions of participants at each site demonstrated improvement in SF-36 scores, self-appraisal of improvement, and reuse of health care services. CONCLUSIONS: Standardized protocols using specific strength and measurement equipment can achieve similar benefits at different sites.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 1--Development and reliability testing.

STUDY DESIGN: Two laboratory studies and one field study evaluated the safety and test-retest reliability of a new test of lift capacity. The first two studies were conducted in a carefully controlled laboratory setting. The first study investigated the safety and intra-rater reliability of the EPIC Lift Capacity test protocol with healthy adult subjects. The second study assessed the safety and inter-rater reliability of the test with disabled subjects. The third study was conducted in the field with 65 evaluators and investigated the safety and intra-rater reliability of the test with healthy adult subjects. OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety and reliability of a new test of lift capacity. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: A new test of lift capacity has been developed. Test development occurred within the context of ergonomic standards and guide-lines of the major professional associations and public agencies that govern test development in the United States. METHODS: In study no. 1, 26 healthy subjects participated. In study no. 2, 14 disabled subjects participated. In study no. 3, 318 healthy subjects participated. After subjects underwent basic screening and warm-up, the EPIC Lift Capacity test was administered. One to 2 weeks later, the test was administered again. Correlations between the times of testing were calculated. RESULTS: No subjects were injured. Hamstring soreness the next day that resolved without complication was reported by some healthy subjects. None of the disabled subjects reported new symptoms. CONCLUSION: The safety and reliability of the EPIC Lift Capacity test was adequately demonstrated in a laboratory setting and across multiple field sites with evaluators who have varying types and degrees of professional preparation.

Adult↗
PubMed1995

A test to measure lift capacity of physically impaired adults. Part 2--Reactivity in a patient sample.

STUDY DESIGN: Test reactivity is the based on the idea that experience with a test may affect performance on subsequent tests, independent of what the test purports to measure. The reactivity of a test of lift capacity was studied in a single-blind randomized clinical trial was studied in a single-blind randomized clinical trial in which subjects were assigned to one or two groups. One group received lift testing before and after a therapeutic trial, while the other group received lift testing only at the conclusion of the therapeutic trial. OBJECTIVE: To measure the reactivity of a lift capacity test over the course of treatment. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The reactivity of a test is an important criterion by which an outcome measure must be judged. Change in response to treatment is assumed to be independent of changes resulting from the evaluee's experience with the test, although this is rarely addressed. METHODS: The EPIC Lift Capacity test was administered to 55 patients with low back pain in a treatment program after they were randomized into a pre-test/post-test and a post-test only group. Additional measures were taken on a pre-test/post-test basis for all subjects. RESULTS: Analyses of variance demonstrated no difference between the randomized groups after treatment. However, the pre-test/post-test group demonstrated significant improvement over the course of treatment. Other measures of outcome were similarly affected. CONCLUSION: The reactivity of the EPIC Lift Capacity test was negligible over an 8-week treatment regimen that did not include lifting tasks.

Adult↗
PubMed1993

Guidelines for functional capacity evaluation of people with medical conditions.

Functional capacity evaluation is an important and widely available service provided by rehabilitation professionals, including many physical therapists. In the absence of agreed-upon professional standards, guidelines for practice have been developed. These guidelines provide a basis for the development of standards of practice which the authors believe should be undertaken on an interdisciplinary basis. These guidelines provide a baseline level of care that should be maintained by physical therapists and others who provide functional capacity evaluation services.

Disability Evaluation↗
PubMed1985

Work hardening: occupational therapy in industrial rehabilitation.

Work hardening, presented in this paper as a "new" service for the industrially injured, is actually well grounded in the traditional models and practices of occupational therapy. From the profession's early roots in industrial therapy to the development of a variety of programs for the industrially injured through the 1950s and 1960s, the historical and philosophical bases of occupational therapy support the use of work as an evaluative and therapeutic medium. What is actually new is the adoption of terminology, technology, and a program format that fits in with the needs of consumers in the 1980s. Recent developments that created the need for the specialized services that occupational therapists are uniquely qualified to provide include growth of private sector vocational rehabilitation, changes in workers' compensation laws, and increasing costs of vocational rehabilitation. This paper describes work hardening in its present form. A case example is given that demonstrates how work hardening can be a cost-effective and time-saving bridge which spans the gap between curative medicine and the return to work.

Accidents, Occupational↗