The impact of an occupational illness or injury on an injured worker can be severe. This study assessed several dimensions of the impact on a group of 50 injured workers, all patients at an Occupational Health Center. The dimensions assessed included aspects of access to health care, support from treating physicians in obtaining Workers' Compensation benefits, financial impacts, the role of attorneys and "Independent Medical Examiners," and the impact on mental health. Many reported that their treating physician did not want to become involved in Workers' Compensation, despite indicating a belief that the health condition was work-related. The financial impacts of a work-related diagnosis were particularly striking, with respondents reporting that they were burdened both with costs directly related to the medical care of their condition, and with coping with ongoing general expenses on a reduced income. Many respondents reported depleting savings, borrowing money, taking out retirement funds, and declaring bankruptcy in efforts to cope. Emotionally, respondents almost universally reported their diagnosis and related issues were associated with depression, anxiety, and loss of identity and self-worth. This study demonstrates how a work-related injury or illness can extend far beyond the physical impact for injured workers. Existing systems fail to adequately compensate or rehabilitate injured workers, leaving them to their own devices to deal with their losses, medical or otherwise.
Treating physicians' and independent medical examiners' (IMEs') opinions were compared to identify differences of opinion and to develop a basis for understanding the differences. Twenty-three patients of an occupational health center (OHC) who had been examined by an IME were studied. OHC and IME opinions regarding diagnosis, work-relatedness, treatment recommendations, and disability assessment were categorized by degree of agreement. There was agreement on all four issues for only one patient. Opinions were most divergent with regard to disability assessment and least divergent with regard to diagnosis. Disagreement was unidirectional: the IMEs made fewer diagnoses, deemed fewer illnesses work-related, made fewer treatment recommendations, and assessed lower levels of disability than the OHC examiners. The results suggest that differences in opinion between the OHC and IMEs are due to differences in perspective, rather than skill or training.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.