Search PubMed⌕ Search

SEARCH · Search PubMed

Results for “Insurance, Disability”

Search indexed PubMed citations on genomics, clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health. Explore titles, authors and supplied subject terms, then open the PubMed record.

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 613 records · Page 34Linked to original sources
PubMed1992

The effect of the Americans With Disabilities Act upon medical insurance and employee benefits.

The Americans With Disabilities Act will have a significant impact upon plan sponsors and the administration of an employee benefit plan. Prior to the July 26, 1992 effective date, a plan sponsor or trustee should meet with the plan's attorney, provider and other insurance advisers and review the effect ADA will have upon the plan. The EEOC will be issuing additional interpretive rules before the effective date of ADA, and there will be numerous court challenges after the effective date. Plan sponsors and trustees should keep abreast of the developments as they occur. Before a benefit change or premium adjustment is made, it should be reviewed with legal counsel to assure that it conforms to ADA's insurance exemption. Plan sponsors and trustees should have legal counsel, the provider and the plan's insurance advisers develop the documentation that will enable the plan to establish ADA's insurance exemption to defend any legal challenge.

Civil Rights↗
PubMed2000

Disability management, employee health and fringe benefits, and long-term-disability claims for mental disorders: an empirical exploration.

Mental disorders account for a large share of claims and benefit costs in both private and public long-term-disability (LTD) insurance programs. This is the first empirical study to explore factors that may explain variations in private-sector LTD claims incidence and cost across groups of employees. Employee fringe-benefit arrangements, including patterns of coverage for mental health treatment, are found to be important predictors of incidence rates. Award rates for public disability insurance coverage (SSDI) are also strongly related to claims incidence, suggesting that private LTD is an important pathway to SSDI benefits. Some employee disability-management strategies, such as front-line manager involvement and provision of alternative jobs for employees returning from disability leave, are predictive of lower claims rates and/or costs.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Impairment and disability rating in low back pain.

LBP is one of the two most common forms of disability in Western society (mental illness is the other), and remains a thorny problem in the arena of disability evaluation. Disability evaluation after LBP differs whether the pain is work-related or not. If work-related, guidelines for disability evaluation differ by jurisdiction and type of employment (e.g., private vs. federal employee). When outside of the workplace, thresholds for disability differ between entitlement programs (Social Security Disability) and private insurance programs (long-term disability insurance). In the patient without obvious findings, the disability evaluating physician needs to be caring and compassionate and yet maintain an objective stance with the understanding that there may be significant psychosocial overlay in patients with nonobjective pain complaints. Although some would argue that objective independent medical evaluation is an oxymoron, psychiatrists have excellent training and perspective with which to do so. The patient suffering from catastrophic brain injury or spinal cord injury offers a useful contrast--on the most severe end of the disability spectrum--to the patient with persisting low back complaints but normal physical examination. As a society, we have to wisely manage the funds that comprise our social "safety net" in order to provide for persons with severe disability who cannot provide for themselves. It would then follow that patients with minor impairments/disabilities should receive minor (i.e., noninflated) ratings. Psychiatrists need to enable rather than disable their patients.

Adult↗
PubMed2000

Are insurance companies liable under the Americans with Disabilities Act?

Federal courts have split on the question of the applicability of the Americans with Disabilities Act to insurance coverage decisions that insurance companies make on the basis of disability; they have similarly split on other issues pertaining to the scope of that Act's application. In deciding whether to read the Act as prohibiting discrimination in insurance decisions that are often crucial in the lives of people with disabilities, courts have faced two problems. First, where it prohibits discrimination in the equal enjoyment of the goods and services of places of public accommodation, the Act's area of concern may be limited to the ability of people with disabilities to gain physical access to facilities; or that area may extend to all forms of disability-based discrimination in the provision of goods and services. This Comment argues that the language and legislative history of the Act are consistent only with the latter view. Second, the provision limiting the Act's applicability to insurance may create an exemption for all insurance decisions; or it may protect only the ability of an insurance company to make an insurance decision to the disadvantage of an insured with a disability where actuarial data support the decision. This comment argues that the ambiguous language of the limiting provision should be resolved in favor of the latter view. Legislative history and the broader background of the history of insurance discrimination law support this resolution. Consequently, the Act should be interpreted as prohibiting disability-based discrimination by insurance companies in selling insurance policies and as defining discrimination as making disability-based insurance decisions without the support of actuarial data. By accepting this interpretation, courts can help stop the pattern of judicial narrowing of the Act's application through inappropriately restrictive statutory construction.

Activities of Daily Living↗
PubMed1986

The role of the primary physician in disability determination for Social Security insurance and workers' compensation.

Primary care physicians frequently are asked to serve as advisors, objective third-party examiners, patient advocates, or adjudicators in different work disability programs, or serve at various functions within the same program. The two largest disability programs are Social Security Disability Insurance and Workers' Compensation. Social Security programs are nationally uniform, based on set criteria, and do not require the applicant to show the cause of his or her impairment. Workers' compensation programs differ from state to state and require that the injury or illness occurred as a result of employment. Physicians are often asked to assess impairment or causality on the basis of incomplete information. Improved awareness of the limitations of our scientific knowledge regarding work disability, and the roles physicians play in the disability process, may reduce frustration for physician and patient.

Disability Evaluation↗
PubMed1979

[Evaluation of the degree of disability for the privately insured patient (author's transl)].

There are marked differences between the public health system and the private insurance system. This paper shows how to evaluate the degree of permanent disability according to "The General Rules for Private Insurances (AUVB 1965)". At the beginning the evaluation of the degree of permanent disability after the visus naturalis or the visus corrected and at unilateral and bilateral aphakia will be discussed. The paper gives detailed information on the degree of disability for: one injured eye, one injured eye with preexisting ocular lesion, bilateral injury, one injured eye with preexisting lesion of the other eye, one injured eye with preexisting ocular lesions of both eyes, bilateral injury with preexisting lesions of both eyes. For bilateral lesions, the degree of disability is calculated as a function of the reduction in activity by the AUVB 1965; this is given in one table. The rules applying to Austria are compared to those valid in the Federal Republic of Germany (AUB). It is very important to understand these methods of calculation, if one wants to secure an objective ophthalmological evaluation of the degree of disability for the privately insured patient.

Austria↗