Electronic Funcational Assessment

[fozzy40]

I had a work comp patient come in with a work related injury. He said he had an Electronic Functional Assessment (http://www.idi-dx.com/efa_faq.htm)

Has anyone seen this? It sounds like a surface EMG with functional tasks. Any credibility to this? I'm doubtful...

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[PMR 4 MSK]

I had a work comp patient come in with a work related injury. He said he had an Electronic Functional Assessment (http://www.idi-dx.com/efa_faq.htm)

Has anyone seen this? It sounds like a surface EMG with functional tasks. Any credibility to this? I'm doubtful...

Agree, looks like BS.

FCE can't be done with surface electrodes. I can see ROM. I can not see any of the other claims being valid. It most certainly is not EMG.

 

[RUOkie]

The EFA is the only equipment that can monitor the muscles in the front of the neck, which can mimic upper extremity complaints such as carpal tunnel syndrome or ulnar neuropathy. This is different than a radicular component. The EFA can distinguish the radicular component in the back of the neck, the myofascial component or distal pathology.

I've been investigating this website, and can't quite figure out what they are doing. It appears to be a way for plaintif attorneys to confuse the issue with a bunch of non-quantifyable "tests". In other words, BS.

If you want an FCE, make sure it is with one of the systems that quantifies their work (it also takes 4 hours), like Matheson et al.

 

[Jitter Bug]

Never heard of it. I went to the website, can't tell what it is. They are hiding behind 12 paragraphs of big fancy words. They must have some old coot MD signing off on these from the golf course.

I don't even order FCE's around here because they always report the same thing-part time work 20-25 hours a week, no crouching, no climbing, and no lifting over 40lbs. Permanently.

 

[RUOkie]

Never heard of it. I went to the website, can't tell what it is. They are hiding behind 12 paragraphs of big fancy words. They must have some old coot MD signing off on these from the golf course.

I don't even order FCE's around here because they always report the same thing-part time work 20-25 hours a week, no crouching, no climbing, and no lifting over 40lbs. Permanently.

<threadjack>

In many jursisdictions you can bill to interpret the FCE. In that case, just ask the PT/OT who adminsiters the test to send you the raw data with validity measures. Then, you do a dictation to interpret the data and do your impairment rating.

Prior to the FCE, you make it clear to the patient that their permanent restrictions do not matter when it comes to their settlement (that is based upon Impairment rating), so it is in their best interest to have a big IR with no permanent restrictions.

<end threadjack>

 

[Jitter Bug]

I'm assuming you mean a real FCE and not this pseudogibberish EFA.

I don't care to sign off of data collected by others where there can be alot of subjectivity "ie patient too exhausted to stand more than 2 hours".

I trust my own eyes, ears and nose, but not others. Probably why I didn't like supervising NP's. I ended up repeating 80% of the work to satisfy my own conclusions.

 

[fozzy40]

Yeah, I thought so. I didn't order this but the patient had it done on day 2 of his injury which I don't think is appropriate at all. He's being his own advocate and I'm seeing him on his own insurance because work comp is saying his back injury is not work related.

 

[RUOkie]

Yeah, I thought so. I didn't order this but the patient had it done on day 2 of his injury which I don't think is appropriate at all. He's being his own advocate and I'm seeing him on his own insurance because work comp is saying his back injury is not work related.

Then do not get involved with any legal questions. If anybody asks you to address work-relatedness, say "I don't know". Or charge them out the ass with $$ up front.

 

[RUOkie]

I'm assuming you mean a real FCE and not this pseudogibberish EFA.

I don't care to sign off of data collected by others where there can be alot of subjectivity "ie patient too exhausted to stand more than 2 hours".

I trust my own eyes, ears and nose, but not others. Probably why I didn't like supervising NP's. I ended up repeating 80% of the work to satisfy my own conclusions.

yes, that is exactly what I mean. This EFA stuff is just crap.

The Blankenship and the Matheson protocols for FCEs are very objective. The examiner just reports what he/she sees. Lots of validity measures. If the patient self-limits then that is what is reported.