PubMed · 14083775
The source did not provide an abstract. Follow the original record for more information.
Explore connections, maps & timelines
G B WICHMAN. 1963. DISABILITY EVALUATION.. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/14083775/
Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.
KEEP EXPLORING
The Dutch Society of Ophthalmology (NOG) has developed an evidence-based guideline for the referral of visually impaired people for rehabilitation and support. Referral for rehabilitation and support must be preceded by diagnosis and treatment. Consultation of an ophthalmologist is essential. Information about the disease should be given to the patient orally as well as in writing. The ophthalmologist brings up the possibility of rehabilitation in the presence of a visual acuity < 0.5 and/or visual field of < 30 degrees in the better eye and a well-defined request for help. Visually impaired patients with a relatively simple request for help are referred to a specialised optometrist whenever possible. Visually impaired patients with more complex requests for help are referred to a multidisciplinary (regional or national) rehabilitation centre for people with a visual handicap. Visually impaired and blind patients are informed about the existence of patient organisations. Referral for rehabilitation is done by means of a structured letter with all relevant information. A copy of this letter should be sent to the family physician and all other attending physicians.
BACKGROUND: Advising on ill-health retirement is an important role of most practising occupational physicians. In recent years, the eligibility criteria and process for gaining early retirement benefits have changed in many pension schemes in the UK. AIM: To investigate the variation in rates of retirement due to ill-health in National Health Service (NHS) Trusts and Local Authorities and to update previously published guidance on ill-health retirement with specific reference to pension schemes with eligibility criteria that include permanence of incapacity due to ill-health. METHODS: Rates of retirement were calculated for 222 NHS Trusts and 132 Local Authorities with more than 1500 employees. Literature searches and consensus statements by the authors. RESULTS: Rates of retirement were widely distributed in the NHS Trusts and Local Authorities. The median rates of retirement were 2.11 (IQR 1.37-2.91)/1000 active members and 4.10 (IQR 3.01-6.10)/1000 employees, respectively (P<0.001). Difficulties in the doctor-patient relationship and in ascertaining the true functional ability of some patients were identified. CONCLUSION: There continues to be marked variation in rates of early retirement due to ill-health within and between organizations that warrants further investigation. The general and specific guidance that appears as an appendix in Supplementary data to this paper should help occupational physicians to make equitable recommendations when assessing applications for early retirement benefits and fitness to work.
OBJECTIVES: To identify all available shoulder disability questionnaires designed to measure physical functioning and to examine those with satisfactory clinimetric quality. METHODS: We used the Medline database and the "Guide des outils de mesure de l'évaluation en médecine physique et de réadaptation" textbook to search for questionnaires. Analysis took into account the development methodology, clinimetric quality of the instruments and frequency of their utilization. We classified the instruments according to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. RESULTS: Thirty-eight instruments have been developed to measure disease-, shoulder- or upper extremity-specific outcome. Four scales assess upper-extremity disability and 3 others shoulder disability. We found 6 scales evaluating disability and shoulder pain, 7 scales measuring the quality of life in patients with various conditions of the shoulder, 14 scales combining objective and subjective measures, 2 pain scales and 2 unclassified scales. Older instruments developed before the advent of modern measurement development methodology usually combine objective and subjective measures. Recent instruments were designed with appropriate methodology. Most are self-administered questionnaires. CONCLUSION: Numerous shoulder outcome measure instruments are available. There is no "gold standard" for assessing shoulder function outcome in the general population.