A Test to Measure Lift Capacity of Physically Impaired Adults Part 2—Reactivity in a Patient Sample

Matheson, Leonard N.; Mooney, Vert; Holmes, Debbie; Leggett, Scott H.; Grant, Janet E.; Negri, Scott; Holmes, Bryon

doi:10.1097/00007632-199510000-00011

Cited by 22 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Inclusion criteria were signing of an informed consent; meeting the criteria of the Physical Activity Readiness Questionnaire; a resting systolic and diastolic blood pressure of less than 159mmHg and 100mmHg, respectively 22 ; age between 20 and 60 years; and subjects working at least 20 hours a week with no absenteeism from work because of musculoskeletal complaints for more than 2 weeks (5%) during 1 year before the FCE. On completion of the FCE, subjects received their personal results, a coupon of €15, and travel expenses.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative Values for a Functional Capacity Evaluation

Soer¹,

Schans²,

Geertzen³

et al. 2009

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The normative values enable comparison of patients' performances to these values. If a patient's performance exceeds the lowest scores in his/her corresponding demand category, then the patient's capacity is very likely to be sufficient to meet the workload. Further, clinicians can make more precise return-to-work recommendations and set goals for rehabilitation programs. A comparison of the normative values can be useful to the fields of rehabilitation, occupational, and insurance medicine. Further research is needed to test the validity of the normative values with respect to workplace assessments and return-to-work recommendations.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Normative Values for a Functional Capacity Evaluation

Soer¹,

Schans²,

Geertzen³

et al. 2009

Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Subjects were included after providing informed consent and signing a statement of good health, when meeting the criteria of the Physical Activity Readiness-Questionnaire (PAR-Q) [ 12 , 13 ], and when they were between 20 and 60 years of age and worked at least 20 h per week for the last year. Excluded were subjects who had been absent from work for more than 2 weeks because of dysfunction of the musculoskeletal system during the year prior to FCE, or subjects whose blood pressure in rest exceeded 159 mmHg (systolic) or 100 mmHg (diastolic) [ 14 ].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Pain Response of Healthy Workers Following a Functional Capacity Evaluation and Implications for Clinical Interpretation

et al. 2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background and aim Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs) are used to quantify physical aspects of work capacity. Safety is a critical issue for clinical use of an FCE. Patients with Chronic Low Back Pain (CLBP) are known to report a temporary increase in pain following an FCE, but it is not known whether this increase is a normal pain response to FCE. It is currently unknown how healthy subjects respond to an FCE and whether this should be interpreted as a normal reaction after physical exercise. This study was performed to quantify the intensity, duration, location and nature of the pain response following an FCE in healthy subjects and to compare this pain response with the pain response of patients with CLBP from a previous study. Methods A total of 197 healthy working subjects between 20 and 60 years of age volunteered to participate in this study. All subjects performed a 12-item FCE. Pain response was measured by a self-constructed Pain Response Questionnaire (PRQ). Descriptive statistics were used to describe the pain response following an FCE. Mann-Whitney and t-tests were performed to compare the data from this study with data of patients with CLBP from a previous study. Results About 82% of all subjects reported a pain response following the FCE. The intensity of the pain response after 24 h post FCE was a median of 3.0 on a numeric rating scale (0-10). About 78% of all pain was reducible to muscle soreness. Pain was most often reported in the upper legs (51%), the lower back (38%) the shoulders (37%) and upper arms (36%). Symptoms decreased to pre-FCE levels in a mean of 3 days. The pain response of 2 subjects (1%) lasted for 3 weeks. The intensity and duration of the pain response of healthy subjects was not significantly different from the response of patients with CLBP. Conclusion Pain response of 99% of all subjects who reported a pain response was interpreted as normal. It was concluded that a pain response following an FCE can be expected in healthy subjects and that this pain response is a normal musculoskeletal reaction. The pain response of patients with CLBP resembles the pain response of healthy subjects.

show abstract

“…The EPIC Lift Capacity (ELC) test has demonstrated safety and reliability [20,35,40] that led to its use in a functional capacity evaluation test battery in a multi-site study in California [41]. Subsequent studies by this research team examined the construct validity and utility of the ELC in treatment settings [25], finding that aerobic capacity and back strength made significant independent contributions to lift capacity [42].…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Age and gender normative data for lift capacity

Matheson¹,

Verna

Dreisinger³

et al. 2014

Work

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BACKGROUND: Functional Capacity Evaluations (FCEs) are routinely used in physical medicine to ascertain an individual's work ability; with lift capacity being an important aspect of many evaluations. Despite the widespread use of lift capacity tests, there are few studies that provide age and gender normative data. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the safety, reliability, and validity of the EPIC Lift Capacity test, and to examine the effects of age and gender on lift capacity. METHODS: This study used a test-retest design with 4,443 adult participants in good general health. Test-retest of participants' lift capacity was undertaken to examine safety and reliability. Age and gender and the self-reported physical demands of each employed participant's usual and customary job were collected to examine validity. RESULTS: Safety and reliability were demonstrated for both measures of lift capacity for each of the six sub-tests in the EPIC Lift Capacity test battery. Inter-subtest differences and expected age and gender differences were found across all subtests. CONCLUSIONS: The EPIC Lift Capacity test is a safe and reliable test of lift capacity. Normative data are presented that allow comparison within age and gender categories.

show abstract

A Test to Measure Lift Capacity of Physically Impaired Adults Part 2—Reactivity in a Patient Sample

Cited by 22 publications

References 0 publications

Normative Values for a Functional Capacity Evaluation

Normative Values for a Functional Capacity Evaluation

Pain Response of Healthy Workers Following a Functional Capacity Evaluation and Implications for Clinical Interpretation

Age and gender normative data for lift capacity

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About