Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

 

1.      Examples of Integrating Language

 

·          The Patient works at Aeromat involved in battery assembly. She states that the batteries would weigh about ten pounds.  Her work was repetitive in that she would hold the battery in her left hand and use an air driven screwdriver in her right hand.  She would do 60 to 70 batteries a day.  There would be 8 to 10 batteries in a box. Each battery had a number of screws per battery.  She also welded wires for the batteries.  She began work on 6/92.  She denied concurrent work or home activities that aggravated her hands. She denied prior symptoms.”

 

·           “26-year old right-handed worker works as a legal processing assistant for Orange County for 10-months.  Job duties at the time of the injury included lifting up to 25lbs., pulling, pushing of the file shelves, stooping, occasional kneeling, bending, working overhead with extended reach for retrieving and filing, as well as performing the scanning tasks. Works on a computer for 7-hours per day, performs fine hand manipulation 8-hours a day.  He states he answered the phone, occasionally writes phone messages. Does document scanning in a separate scanning room/area.  Job information was obtained from the patient.”   Kaiser Occupational Medicine Dept.

 

A       Reporting Functional Loss and/or Work Modifications

 

Lifting Capacity:  Without information about the employee’s pre-injury lifting capacity, restrictions addressing a ‘poundage -range’ can produce multiple results.   Under the Spine/Torso Guideline of No Very Heavy Lifting, you find the general guidelines for determining  ‘loss of lifting capacity’.

 

1.       A statement inability to lift 50 pounds” is not meaningful. Determine loss of pre-injury capacity due to an inability to lift, by comparing the individual’s pre-injury lifting capacity with the current lifting capacity.  Take into consideration, the total lifting effort, weight, distance, endurance, frequency, body position and comparable physical factors with reference to a particular individual.

 

“What is the specific information of what the person lifted and carried at work?  A general statement is insufficient.  [15- pound maximum lift and carry limit] The example opinion generally states applicant had to “lift and carry things” (presumably) at work.  However, there must be facts about the nature of the work in order to support an opinion that lifting and carrying things caused injury.  What kinds of items were lifted and carried?  How much did the items weigh?  How often were the items carried?  How far were the items moved?  The questions are numerous.  If the person is lifting and carrying two 2-ounces of paper clips, once a day, cumulative trauma to the low back from lifting and carrying would seem highly unlikely.  If the person were carrying 100-pound blocks of granite 12 hours a day, cumulative trauma would seem more plausible.  The Judge’s Perspective: Writing Usable Medical Reports, by William J. Ordas / Nikki S. Udkovich.

 

2.       Reporting Consonant Loss of Pre-injury lifting capacity:

Understanding Scheduled Levels of Pre-injury Capacity Functional Loss

 

Spine/Torso ‘Benchmarks’ address percentages of work capacity functional loss to perform a specific function or groups of functions.  Once the core of physical activities (lifting, bending, stooping, etc.) has reached a level of loss as defined by a Limitation to Light Work, additional guidelines address limitations of weight bearing functions. 

 

·          No Very Heavy Lifting: Approximately a 25% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting.

 

·          No Very Heavy Work: Approximately a 25% loss of capacity for lifting and other arduous demands.

 

·          No Heavy Lifting: Approximately a 50% loss of lifting capacity.

 

·          No Heavy Work: Approximately a 50% loss of lifting capacity and other arduous physical demands. (No Sustained Work)

 

·          No Repetitive Motions of The Neck/Spine: Approximately 50% loss for the weighted spinal motions.

 

·          No Substantial Work: Approximately a 75% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting and demanding physical activities.

 

·          Limitation to Light Work: - Can work with a minimum of demands for physical effort.

Page 09 of 15

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

3.      Example of Consonant Reporting:

 

·         Preclusion from No Heavy Lifting: Approximately 50% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting.   LC§ 4660

 

·        Example: Employee’s lifting pre-injury capacity as per the Job Description (RU-91) was 80 pounds.  Employee’s current lifting ability is now limited to between 40-50 pounds. LC§ 4636

 

Loss of Pre-Injury Lifting Capacity Calculation:

(1) Pre-injury lifting capacity: 80Lbs.   (2) Residual Lifting Capacity 40-50lbs

80lbs (minus) – 45 (average of 40-50lbs limitation) = 35 (divided) ÷ 80 =

45% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting.

Spine/Torso ‘Benchmark’ Percentages of Disability & Functional Loss:

Multiple factors of disability will have some redundancy in how the elements of disability affect specific abilities or overall function.  If added together, they would create a greater amount of Permanent Disability than actually exists.  General guidelines for determining “loss of lifting capacity” are found under the Spine/Torso benchmark for No Very Heavy Lifting. (Page 2-14 of The Schedule). Without information about the employee’s pre-injury lifting capacity, restrictions addressing a ‘poundage -range’ can produce two different results.  8 CCR Evaluation Guidelines:  8 CCR 46, 9725 & 9727.

00

03

05

08

10

13

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Pre-Injury Loss:

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

40%

45-50%

55-60%

65-70%

75-80%

85-90%

95-100%

Spine/Torso Motion:

< 20-25%

­

­

 

50%

 

­

 

80+

Back Braces:

< Canvas with Metal

 

< Chairback Brace

Taylor Type Brace =

No Repetitive Motions of the Neck or Spine =

Approximately 50% loss of pre-injury capacity for flexing, extending, bending, and rotating the neck or back.  

­

< (By Analogy) Work with Minimal Spinal Movement. (Sustained Movement)

Residual Lifting Capacity for:

76-100lbs.

< 51-75

­

< 26-50

< 11-25

< 0-10

 

Residual Lifting Capacity for:

51-75lbs

< 26-50

11-25

< 0-10

­

­

 

 

< Disability Precluding Very Heavy Lifting:

Approximately 25% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting.  

No Very Heavy Work: =

Approximately a 25% Loss Of Pre-Injury Capacity For Bending, Stooping, Lifting, pushing, pulling, climbing or other activities involving comparable physical effort.  

< Disability Precluding Heavy Lifting: Approximately 50% loss of pre-injury capacity.

No Heavy Lifting and Repeated Bending and Stooping: =

Approximately 50% loss of pre-injury capacity for lifting bending and stooping.    

< NO HEAVY WORK: 50% loss of pre-injury capacity for bending, stooping, lifting, pushing, pulling, climbing or other activities of comparable physical effort.

No Substantial Work: =

Approximately 75% loss of pre-injury capacity for performing bending, stooping, lifting, pushing, pulling, climbing or other activities of comparable effort.

 

Limitation to Light Work: =

Work in a standing or walking position, with a minimum of demands for physical effort.

Functional Loss Key: Prolonged (25%) Repetitive (50%) Substantial (75%) Sustain (100%)

Frequency Key: Rare (1/5) Occasional (1/4) Intermittent (1/2) Frequent (3/4) Constant (4/4)

LPC (06-05-1998)Ó Copyrighted Material No Part Of This Table May Be Reproduced, Reused, Republished Or Transmitted In Any Form, Or Stored In A Data Base Or Retrieval System, Without Written Permission. 

 

4.       Under-Reporting lifting capacity: Open Ended Statements

(Vagueness leads to disputes.)

 

A   Avoid inconsistencies and reporting inadequacies by considering the already scheduled terminology for loss of pre-injury capacity as it relates to the injured employee’s functional loss.

 

Estimate more exactly (the overall level of functional loss) when sufficient information is available: i.e. - your own description of job functions, RU-91, Job Analysis, current job functions, deportment, etc.

1.       Example of Open Ended Language:  Lifting Capacity is now 30-45lbs

a.      6A 50%-60% loss of pre-injury lifting capacity? 

b.      A 15-20% Loss of Pre-injury lifting capacity?

Page 10 of 15

 

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

5.       Avoiding Identifying Language Becoming Problematic: 

 

“Employee began working in September 1994, in the capacity of general laborer. Never returned to work to the same job. Now finishing rehabilitation courses to become an eco-systems technician.”

 

The Heaviest of Strength & Physical Demands?

DWC: (1st Digit of Group #)

REQUIREMENTS

Strength Factors / (DOT Pages 1012-1013)

Heaviest Item

Heavy Work

In Excess of Those for Medium Work

50-100 lbs Occasionally

50+ lbs Frequently

Greater than 10-20 lbs of force CONSTANTLY

??

 

“Job duties consisted (but not limited to) of preparing a mixed salad with croutons.”

 

General Laborer: The Lightest of Strength & Physical Demands

DWC: (1st Digit of Group #)

REQUIREMENTS

Strength Factors / (DOT Pages 1012-1013)

Heaviest Item

Very Light Work

(Sedentary Type Work

Sitting Most of the Time

0-10 lbs. of force Occasionally/ Negligent Force CONST

Walking/Standing Occasionally

??

 

“Would work on a conveyor belt, placing, salad, chicken, croutons or dressing in a small box.  Placing the completed boxes in a table next to the conveyor belt so other employees could reach them and pack them.”

 

Food Worker, Maintaining a Production Rate (?)

DWC: (1st Digit of Group #)

REQUIREMENTS

Strength Factors / (DOT Pages 1012-1013)

Heaviest Item

Light Work

In Excess of Those for Sedentary Work

20 lbs. of force Occasionally

0-10 lbs. of force Frequently

Negligible force constantly to move objects.

Can Include Maintaining a Production Rate Pace

??

 

 

“Employee began working in September 1994, in the capacity of general laborer. Never returned to work to the same job. Now finishing rehabilitation courses to become an eco-systems technician. Job duties consisted (but not limited to) of preparing a mixed salad with croutons. Would work on a conveyor belt, placing, salad, chicken, croutons or dressing in a small box.  Placing the completed boxes in a table next to the conveyor belt so other employees could reach them and pack them. “Required to lift/carry boxes of supplies weighing up to 30lbs. Worked in a standing/bending position during her shift.”

 

Food Worker – Light to Medium Work –Maintaining a Production Rate

DWC: (1st Digit of Group #)

REQUIREMENTS

Strength Factors / (DOT Pages 1012-1013)

Heaviest Item

Medium Work

In Excess of Those for Light Work

20-50 lbs Occasionally

10-25 lbs Frequently

Greater than 10 lbs of force CONSTANTLY to Move Objects

30lbs

 

 

Page 11 of 15

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

 

III                  Avoiding Misconceptions When Supporting Work Capacity Functional Loss: L

 

J Support all disability: identify and define medical impairment, subjective disability and the need for work restrictions. 

 

L The word ‘prophylactic’ and other ‘buzz words’ should not ‘disguise’ the lack of findings or be the only support for any of your descriptions of functional loss.

 

Cumulative Trauma: Not in itself a diagnostic validation - but rather an identifier of a heterogeneous group of diagnoses. There must be a causal relationship between work activities and the diagnosis, not merely the presence of the diagnosis, in order to determine work-relatedness. It is the physician’s responsibility to identify the occupational risk factors – specific information regarding repetition, force, vibration, cold exposure, other risk factors, and combinations thereof.

 

“A 61% PD Rating based on a limitation to Semi-Sedentary Work for an employee who suffered a sprained ankle with residual disability only of minimal to slight subjective complaints, becoming more than moderate on prolonged weight bearing, was not supported by substantial evidence in light of the entire record, and was fundamentally unmerited. The WCAB Judge did not weigh the Medical Examiner’s conclusion against other competent evidence, which either diminished or contradicted the conclusion.  Universal City Studios, Inc. vs. WCAB (Lewis), 44 CCC 113.

 

A       Misconceptions:

 

°          L Following established guidelines for the format of the medical-legal report, and listing diagnoses, surgical procedures, testing results and need for treatment, relieves the examiner from the burden of providing a reasoned opinion supported by examination findings.

 

°          L Objective Measurable Physical Elements and Subjective Disability don’t have to be in consonance or correlate to the work capacity functional loss addressed under the work restrictions.  Injured Worker’s Subjective Complaints are sufficient to support all functional loss.

 

°          L The use of the terms ‘Cumulative Trauma’ dispenses the need for supporting objective findings.

 

B      Consonant J or Discordant L Descriptions of Disability:

 

1.       Example # 1Factors: “ 26-year old right-handed worker works as a legal processing assistant for Orange County for 10-months.  Job duties at the time of the injury included lifting up to 25lbs., pulling, pushing of the file shelves, stooping, occasional kneeling, bending, working overhead with extended reach for retrieving and filing, as well as performing the scanning tasks. Works on a computer for 7-hours per day, performs fine hand manipulation 8-hours a day.  He states he answered the phone, occasionally writes phone messages. Does document scanning in a separate scanning room/area.  Job information was obtained from the patient.”   – HMO Occupational Medicine Dept.

 

a.      P&S Report description of Factors:

 

°          Objective FactorsMild Tenderness at the extensor wad bilaterally, right ulnar and trapezius muscle. Full range of motion of the shoulders, elbows, forearms, wrists and hands. No evidence of atrophy in any of the major groups of the bilateral upper extremities.

°          Subjective Factors:  At rest occasional mild stiffness and pain in the right arm, hand and fingers, increasing to slight-to-moderate with prolonged gripping, grasping, lifting and reaching out. 

 

Ö         Rater’s Calculation: Einstein-Horner Formulation (for Overlapping Subjective Factors of Disability): Basic Pain: 00% = [30%(slight-to-moderate) x (20% prolonged activities) = 06% » 05%

Page 12 of 15

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

b.      P&S Report description of Factors: (Continued)

 

°          Work Restrictions: “Prophylactically, he is precluded from scanning more than 1-hour in the morning and one hour in the afternoon as this requires prolonged gripping, grasping and reaching out tasks. He may perform other work during the rest of the workday. He may be able to perform more scanning if the work station in the scanning area is ergonomically corrected as previously recommended.”

 

Ö        Rater’s Calculation for The Loss of Pre-injury Capacity:

 

·         No Prolonged Activities 25% loss » 1/8 weighted fraction from page 7-6 of The Schedule.

 

°          Appliances Required:  Bilateral Soft Braces. ??

 

To be used at work? To be used intermittently? Occasionally? To be used night? Where are the measurable and clinical findings supporting the need for these devices during working hours?

 

PROVISIONAL RATING – PERMANENT DISABILITY RANGE:

MEDICAL REPORT IS INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT

1.       Physician fails to describe if the required appliances are clinically prescribed and or required to be use during working hours.

Rating Loss Of Pre-Injury Capacity In The Upper Extremities

Two distinct systems are used to describe disability – (1) The Objective/Subjective Index and the (2) Work Capacity Index. When both are used, the index producing the higher rating is used.” Schedule: Page 1-3 (Indexes of Disability)

Ö         Calculation must take into consideration the scheduled differences for handedness.

Ö         Ratings require more Precise Calculation Than the Use of ‘Plateau Guidelines.’

(1) There Are No Ratable Measurable Factors of Disability. S

(2) Rating Calculation Under The Subjective Factors of Disability would rate:

7.1    -   5% - 111 - G -   6 - 6

= 06%

(3) Disability under the Work Capacity Index Rates:

1/8  (9.5112 -  41% - 111 - G -  44 - 44) 6

= 06%

S Orthopedic Appliances, when prescribed, may be given consideration in the determination.

37/92  (9.5113 -  90% - 111 - G -  91 - 91) 37

= 37%

 

Weighted Fraction Calculation For Formula 9.5113- 90% 

The Need To Wear Bilateral Soft Wrist Splints During Working Hours.

1.Equivalent Fractions are obtained from Page 7-6 of The Schedule.

Fraction

Hand Formulas Only Modified for Occupation

Weighted Loss

2/5

(9.511  -  45% - 111 - G -  48)

19

2/5

(9.5112 -  41% - 221 - G -  44)

18

 

 

 

 

92

37

LPC (06-05-1998)Ó

Denominator =

Numerator =

 

2.       Example # 2 Factors: J “Objective factors of disability include pain on supraspinatus testing, a positive Hawkins-Kennedy sign on the right (which improved following a subacromial injection and shoulder arthroscopic surgery). Shoulder elevation is to 1600.  Also, right grip weakness of approximately 20% as per physical examination.  The patient is right hand dominant.  The grip weakness was noted on Jamar Testing in pounds and is listed under Physical Examination.  Pain is minimal-to-slight without provocation.”

Page 13 of 15

 

 

 

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

 

3.       Example # 2 Factors: J “Objective factors of disability include pain on supraspinatus testing, a positive Hawkins-Kennedy sign on the right (which improved following a subacromial injection and shoulder arthroscopic surgery). Shoulder elevation is to 1600.  Also, right grip weakness of approximately 20% as per physical examination.  The patient s right hand dominant.  The grip weakness was noted on Jamar Testing in pounds and is listed under Physical Examination.  Pain is minimal-to-slight without provocation.”

 

è      Work Restrictions:  

1.       Upper Arms: No repetitive work at or above shoulder level including lifting, reaching, pushing, pulling.”

a.       50% loss » 1/2 weighted fraction from page 7-4 of The Schedule  

 

2.       Lower Arms: “Should avoid very forceful torquing with his right upper extremity and should avoid very heavy lifting with the right upper extremity.  He has lost approximately 25% of his total pre-injury capacity for lifting

a.       25% loss » 1/8 weighted fraction from page 7-6 of The Schedule.

 

Recommended Rating  (Bus Driver # 250)  Age 45  J

1/2  (7.331  -  15% - 250 - F -  15 - 16) 08

Upper Arm

½[1/8  (10.511 -  40% - 250 - F -  40 - 42) 05] 03

Lower Arms

Weighted Subjectives: 03

Basic Pain At Rest

14

= 14%

ÛCombining Disabilities in a Single Extremity:  Subjective factors due to the disabling effects of pain, if any, are added after gradation of their value due to the nature and magnitude of the overall disability.”  [Schedule, page 1-4.)       

 

4.       Example # 3 Factors: L J

 

 “She worked at a mini storage unit.  She opened up in the mornings. Her job consisted of showing units, cleaning, units, ledgering accounts, preparing late and legal notices, and cleaning the yard. Once a week she moved a commercial dumpster, on Wednesdays. She tripped and fell on the sidewalk the day she was injured.”

 

°          Objective FactorsNormal posture and stance. No muscle wasting or evidence of atrophy.  Full range of motion of the shoulders, elbows, forearms, wrists and hands.  Palpatory tenderness over the base of the right little finger. Grip (R/L): 70 / 70  (Rapid Exchange) 69/63 – no ratable reduction of grasping power. Average grip strength for a 57-year old as per Mathiowatz: 57-pounds.   X-rays:  No arthritis is noted. Joint alignment, intact.

 

°          Subjective Factors:  Occasional slight pain in the right hand that is exacerbated with lifting and gripping  (Q: All lifting and gripping? Forceful Gripping? Repetitive Gripping?). Should be rated as occasional moderate pain. 

 

Ö         Rater’s Calculation: Einstein-Horner Formulation (for Overlapping Subjective Factors of Disability): Basic Pain: 01% = [25%(moderate) – 01 = 24 x 1/4 (occasional) 06 x  40 (activities-full value of not grasping) =2.4] 3.4 = 03%

 

°          Work Restrictions:  “I agree with Dr. Williamson’s work restrictions.  The work restrictions are no lifting more than 15-pounds with the right upper extremity and occasional gripping, grasping with the right hand and occasional typing.

 

°          Vocational Rehabilitation/ Job Modifications: Not QIW – can return to her job at Security Public Storage.

 

Ö         Rater’s Calculation for The Loss of Pre-injury Capacity:

 

·          75% loss of pre-injury capacity for grasping » 4/9 weighted fraction. 

 

·          No typing/Fine Manipulation – 50% loss of pre-injury capacity 1/3 weighted fraction

 

·          Can do Occasionally – 75% loss (3/4) x 1/3 = 3/12 » 3/10

 

Page 14 of 15

 

 

 

 

 

Luis Pérez-Cordero

PD Rating Specialist

mailto:pdrating@pacbell.net

California Permanent Disability Ratings

WWW.PDRATINGS.COM

Voice: (415)-861-4040

Craig A. Lange

Administrator/Med Report Tech

mailto:craiglange@pacbell.net

Permanent & Stationary Comprehensive Medical Report

Common Report Errors And How To Fix Them

 

PROVISIONAL RATING – PERMANENT DISABILITY RANGE:

MEDICAL REPORT IS INTERNALLY INCONSISTENT

2.       Physician fails to describe if the required appliances are clinically prescribed and or required to be use during working hours.

(1) There Are No Ratable Measurable Factors of Disability.

(2) Rating Calculation Under The Subjective Factors of Disability would rate:

7.1    -   3% - 111 - G -   4 - 5

= 05%

(3) Disability under the Work Capacity Index Rates: No Grasping

4/9  (10.511 -  40% - 111 - E -  37 - 41) 18

= 18%

(4) For Comparison Purposes Only: 75% loss of Keyboarding Ability

3/10  (9.511  -  45% - 111 - G -  48 - 52) 16

= 16%

Rating Loss Of Pre-Injury Capacity In The Upper Extremities

Calculation must take into consideration the scheduled differences for major/minor hands.

Upper Extremity Ratings Require more Precise Evaluation Than the Use of ‘Plateau Guidelines.’

 

1.       Lower Arm (elbow to hand): The Schedule provides for ratings under multiple indexes such as strength (grip), limitation of motion (manipulation) or amputation, with the proviso that these indexes are not in addition to each other.  Because or the inherent nature of finger mobility is inseparable from the strength functions of the hand, to avoid ‘duplication’ among factors of disability, we weight the percentages loss of function with the use of The Hand Scale for Rating Reduction of Grip Strength on page 7-6 of the Schedule.

 

2.       Strength/Forceful Activities (Grip): 

 

a.       75% loss of pre-injury capacity for grasping  » 4/9 weighted fraction from page 7-6 of The Schedule.     

 

3.       Manipulation & Dexterity (Motion): No typing/Fine Manipulation – 50% loss of pre-injury capacity 1/3 weighted fraction.   Can do Occasionally – 75% loss (3/4) x 1/3 = 3/12 » 3/10  new weighted fraction from page 7-6 of The Schedule.     

 

Lower Arm – Strength Or Dexterity Functions

Weighted Fractions To Be Applied To Formulas:

10.511-10.512 - 10.513 – 85%  / (Forceful Activities/Gripping/Torquing/Pushing, Pulling)

9.5111- 9.812 - 9.5113- 90% / (Manipulation/Dexterity/Mobility/Flexion & Extension)

Functional Loss

Weighted

Percentage of Loss

Weighted Fraction:

Functional Loss

Weighted

Percentage of Loss

Weighted Fraction:

 

10%

1/30

 

40%

1/4

 

15%

1/20

Example # 3

75% loss of pre-injury capacity for Fine Manipulation

45%

3/10

Occasional Use of Wrist Braces

20%

1/12

Repetitive Activities

No Fine Manipulation

No Sustained Activities

50%

1/3

Example # 2

Prolonged Activities

25%

1/8

Example # 1

Soft/Molded Braces

55%-65%

2/5

No Repetitive Typing

30%

1/6

Example # 3

75% loss of grasping ?

(70-75%)

4/9

Intermittent Use of Wrist Braces

35%

1/5

Light

Minimal Demands

5/10

ÛMaintains objective correlation among rating standards of disability (Immobility & Amputation: 7.143.)

LPC (06-05-1998)Ó Copyrighted Material No Part Of This Table May Be Reproduced, Reused, Republished Or Transmitted In Any Form, Or Stored In A Data Base Or Retrieval System, Without Written Permission. 

 

Page 15 of 15

 

Physician's Page   Report Errors pgs 1-8       Home