Testing Lifting Capacity: Validity of Determining Effort Level by Means of Observation

Abstract

Effort level can be determined validly by means of visual observation.

Normative kinematics of reaching and dexterity tasks: moving towards a quantitative baseline for Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs)

“…Similarly, almost every task required some level of wrist ulnar deviation. The ulnar deviation angles recorded in this study would Marmer et al 2002;Reneman, Fokkens et al 2005). Therefore, the addition of objective confirmation based on kinematic data can increase not only the confidence in an evaluator's decision that a patient is or is not ready to start the return to work process but can also increase the confidence of the patient of their ability to return to work without re-injury.…”

“…Some previous guidelines for observation of typical mechanics during FCEs exist, but they are nearly exclusively for floor to waist lifting tasks (Smith 1994;Reneman, Fokkens, et al 2005). In addition, aspects of the established definitions are vague.…”

“…Further, this system has comparatively low equipment requirements, allowing for evaluations that are more directly relatable to the workplace. Finally, the WWS has been demonstrated to have good reliability and construct validity (Hart 1988;Reneman et al 2002;Reneman, Fokkens, et al 2005;Brouwer et al 2003;Gross & Battié 2003), with one review reporting the WWS to have the highest reliability and predictive validity among different commercially available FCE systems (Gouttebarge et al 2004). …”

An examination of the perceptions of functional capacity evaluations in Prince George, British Columbia: A case study.

“…It is suggested that methods for determining sincerity of effort have limited scientific support and should not be included in Functional Capacity Evaluations (Fishbain, Abdel-Moty, Cutler, Rosomoff, & Steele-Rosomoff, 1999a;Gibson & Strong, 2003;Kennedy, 2003;Lechner et al, 1998;Lemstra et al, 2004;Strong & Westmorland, 1996). Furthermore, there is no evidence about the reliability or validity of the application of the tests to determine sincerity of effort specific to Functional Capacity Evaluations (Reneman, Fokkens, Dijkstra, Geertzen & Groothoff, 2005). The implications o f identifying an evaluee as providing submaximal effort are significant and could include the termination of benefits, loss of employment, loss of retraining opportunities, loss o f accommodation, reduced medical legal settlements, or loss of access to medical services (Lemstra et al, 2004;Matheson, 2003;Roy, 2003).…”

“…The Clinician explained that when there is a discrepancy with the evaluee's self-report and actual functional abilities that the Clinician will inquire with the evaluee regarding the discrepancy and will include the explanation in the report. Specific to inconsistent effort within the testing protocol, the Clinician indicated that "you (Reneman et al, 2005). The Clinician identified that despite support from the testing protocol with the determination of submaximal performance, ultimately, it was a judgment and a subjective measure.…”