AMA Guides 6th edition impairment rating calculator software

AMA 6^th edition impairment rating solution

The new AMA Guides 6^th edition impairment rating calculator software by Disability Technology inc is the latest innovation technology in impairment evaluation measurement that would facilitates any evaluation of impairment rating with accuracy.

For any question, please contact disability technology at 972-716-9595 or hopkinsjh@sbcglobal.net or www.disabilitytec.com

 

Software AMA 6th edition

Software AMA Guides 6^th edition

 

The new changes in the AMA Guides 6^th edition are as follow according to AMA:

AMA Evidence-based Approach:

• Historically, numerical ratings for organ system and whole person impairment are based largely on consensus and expert opinion.

 

• Evidence base for impairment percentages assignable to ICF functional levels must wait further empirical testing.

 

• Current literature consulted to ensure evidence based

approach for diagnoses used to determine consensus-based impairment ratings.

 

• Normative judgments that are not data driven tend to follow precedent and must await future validation studies.

 

Rating percentages derived according to the AMA Guides must be functionally-based, whenever possible.

- patient functional history can be assessed according to basic ADLs

- self-report functional assessment tools also available and applicable

 

AMA Guides must stress conceptual and methodological congruity within and between organ system ratings.

 

For any further information, you can contact Disability Technology at disabilitytec.com, 972-716-9595

 

 

 

Many Doctors are using AMA Guides 6th edition in U.S.A

Disability Technology Inc is a medical software company specializes in impairment rating calculation and disability software.

According to the AMA, the new AMA Guides 6^th edition is different for following reason:

·       Intent of AMA Guides 6^th edition is to rate a patient after treatment has been completed.

·       There is a statistically significant difference between ratings when comparing the six editions to the fifth edition, but not comparing the six edition to the Fourth edition.

·       Average values had increased from the 4^th edition to the fifth edition without clear scientific rationale.

·       Many of the more meaningful changes were for spine-related diagnoses that resulted in surgery.

·       Diagnoses not previously ratable (e.g. soft tissue)may result in small impairments.

·       Consistent process should result in improved inter-rater reliability.

For any more information, please contact www.disabilitytec.com

hopkinsjh@sbcglobal.net