ACCforum: Functional Capacity Evaluation - ACCforum

Jump to content

Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

Functional Capacity Evaluation

#1 User is offline   pain_b_gone 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 8
  • Joined: 24-October 07

Posted 31 January 2008 - 11:56 AM

Hi all - I trust everyone had a lovely Christmas and 2008 will be hassle free for all.

I wrote towards the end of last year regarding ACC's request for me to do a work trial and that my GP had cleared me to do this for 1 hour a day, for 1 day, for 1 week.

A new IRP was prepared stating this action, with the help of my GP we made ammendments stating my physical limitations and noted that I had signed this believing that letters from myself and my GP would be read and taken into consideration according to Part 2 of Claimants Code of Rights. This IRP was accepted and a copy returned to me.
My GP's letter to my CM stated "This ladies problem is now permanent and severely restricts her quality of life. I do not believe this lady is ever going to be fit for any work. I believe that trying to get her back to work may aggravate her already debilitating condition". My letter expressed my concerns and outlined the impact and limitations my condition had on my life.

I received a letter on the 9th January introducing yes, another new CM.
She phoned this morning introducing herself, she then went on to explain that both letters had been read and taken into consideration - BUT as my IMA indicated that certain jobs may be physically suitable but only by doing a work trial would show if my pain and physical limitations would tolerate this - it had been decided that a Functional Capacity Evaluation should be done to see exactly what levels of certain functions I was capable of. My IRP would be updated including this once a referral to an assessor had been accepted.

Has anyone done a FCE and if so what should I expect? A list of providers will be sent out for me to choose from, I live in the Waikato and if anyone has done a FCE, is there anyone one provider that is recommended?

Once again thanks so much for those of you who take the time to offer constructive advice.

Cheers for now.
0

#2 User is offline   Huggy 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1219
  • Joined: 18-October 05

Posted 31 January 2008 - 12:07 PM

The FCE test are a load of crap. Been there done that and it aggravated injuries that i had previously gained from a motor vehicle accident that hadnt given me trouble for years. So bad in fact i had to immediatly go to my GP get some serious pain medication. I also challenged the FCE and that America is now throwing FCE tests out when they come into court because simply you cannot determine someones ability to work by a 2 or 3 hour FCE test and then multiply the test findings to get a 40 hour week. There is also no known way to determine if there equipment like strength grip etc are calibrated and accurate.

I believe taking a FCE is now not compulsary. I belive the ombudsman has ruled on this. Hopefully there are some people on the board that can confirm if this is the case or not.
0

#3 User is offline   MG 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 503
  • Joined: 05-February 04

Posted 31 January 2008 - 12:19 PM

Huggy I think you're right. Claimants should not agree to IRPs requiring them to undertake FCEs. If ACC goes ahead and deems the IRP to be in effect, take to review followed by appeal. Claimants should also see their GPs and instruct them to write to ACC, asking for detailed information about the physical and mental demands of FCEs. Once the GP has this information, claimants should ask them to write to ACC if they believe the proposed FCE is unsuitable for tehir patient. IMHO, this is a good test of the GPs commitment to the welfare of their patients v any "incentives" they may have received from ACC. Also and BTW, Mr Bob Sellars, who made $$$$ bringing FCE's into NZ and persuading ACC to impose them on claimants, is reliably quoted as telling a conference in Australia that a large number of people with personal injuries exaggerate their symptoms in order to receive financial compensation and that FCEs are able to weed them out. This view has also been adopted by the Occupational Medicine branch of the Australasian College of Physicians, many of whom are dear friends of readers of this site and whose compassionate medical assessments form the basis of decisions by ACC and insurers to dump them off their books. From time to time, these thinly-veiled "fraud "allegations make it into legal proceedings, where FCE results form a significant part of the "factual evidence" presented to reviewers and Courts. So don't have a bar of FCEs.
0

#4 User is offline   MINI 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 7810
  • Joined: 09-October 07

Posted 31 January 2008 - 01:57 PM

They have made a decision to ignore your own Doctor.

I woule take that straight to Review, then onto appeal.

Surely there is case law out there to help this person.

Personally I have not had much trouble with IMA as CM preferred my doctors and mine to the IMA one. With got me onto long term. The opposite to this poor person.

What area are you in and do you have any ACC support system where you live??

Cheers Mini
0

#5 User is offline   Not Waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 24-December 07

Posted 31 January 2008 - 02:25 PM

The problem I have with the FCE is that it contain psychological profiling questions and I wonder whether the physio running the evaluation is qualified to make such assessments.

While ACC can require a claimant under assessments and a claimant has a responsibility to attend such assessments (meaning a compliance issue), I question whether the FCE fits into this category if a physio is not a registered medical practitioner and therefore not qualified to provide a medical opinion of a psychological nature.

I would be interested in others opinions.
0

#6 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 31 January 2008 - 02:40 PM

The Functional Capacity Assessment has its origins in America in an attempt to be an objective assessment as opposed to other medical professionals were attempting to tell the courts was a subject to assessment carried out by the medical professionals. This argument raged for quite some time.

The 1992 legislation required the ACC to come up with a mechanism of assessment and to produce regulations. We Ended up with the Regulations during 1997 from which the Work Capacity Assessment Procedure is derived.

Essentially the Functional Capacity Assessment falls into the same category as a private investigator making observations or collecting observations from members of the public. This issue is of course central to New Zealand's biggest ACC district court hearing, my own. ACC have relied upon reports taken by private investigators while I rely upon the expertise of the specialist medical professionals, occupational assessors and of course I had funded Dr Emrys (ACC is own medical assessor) and last but not least an assessmennt carried out by FCA in Newmarket.

I have always argued for a more refined occupational assessment detailing individual work task activities and capacities that make up the whole occupation engaged in with medical assessors approving or disapproving each of those activities as they pertain to the injury and ACC liability. ACC do not like my approach to object of assessments preferring instead to rely upon the subjective assumptions of members of the public and private investigators. ACC, legal professionals, including Reviewers, district court judges and no doubt the levy payers prefer a rather loose subjective assessment that allows the needs of the greater to outweigh the needs of the invalid.

I feel that objective assessment is superior but the means by which to conduct that subjective assessment needs to be improved vastly beyond what the current Functional Capacity Assessment can even begin to deliver. Perhaps the activities should be supervised by the treatment provider who will say what can and cannot even be tested and those things of which there are a limited capacity tested for sustainability. For example I can writebut there is a limitted capacity. If someone sees the right that is not in itself evidence that I am not injured and not entitled to ACC.
0

#7 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 31 January 2008 - 04:54 PM

Mg has listed a good example of what to follow.

I think that it is important that you find what tasks that they are going to assess you on. this is also what jobs have they said that you can do.

Have the IMA assessor got can't do that job or is it can not do certain tasks and can do other tasks. this is very important.

Your Doctor says that you can not work at anything

ACC are saying that you can carry out some type of work.

ACC are now going to prove that you Doctor is lying in the medical certificated and letters. You told the Doctor and you signed the certificated saying that you can not work.

ACC is trying to say that you are a lier. they will use the FCE to show that you you have been dishonest to your Doctor.

Good thing is that medical certificates can claim that under section 103 the medical certificate may be correct.

Are you going to say what your injury is and what jobs has the Assessor said that you can complete.
0

#8 User is offline   greg 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1159
  • Joined: 15-September 03

Posted 31 January 2008 - 05:05 PM

The FCE I went to was based on a' windows 98 version' thats was the quality in year 2002
0

#9 User is offline   Stumpy 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2
  • Joined: 16-September 03

Posted 31 January 2008 - 09:35 PM

FCE's are aload of C..p. All they show is what you could do at that particular time. They do not show if you can do it for 8 hours per day 5 days per week 52 weeks of the year. It is all very subjective to the moment. If you are rquired to attend one my advise is to go but do no more than you think fit. At least that way you have complied. My Dr said I was not to go for one and ACC insisted. I went, did the required amount and that was it. I repeat. A lod of codswallop to make people like Mr Sellars rich. I have NEVER EVER seen a physio's rooms equiped like that. He doesn't do physiotherapy he just lines his own pockets.
Be ware!!!!!!!!!!!

Stumpy B)
0

#10 User is offline   Sparrow 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 534
  • Joined: 22-March 07

Posted 31 January 2008 - 09:41 PM

The ombubdsman did declare that noone has to attend these and it is somewhere , the ruling up on forum.
They make you sign that you will not hold them liable for any injury from the FCE>
Well, what you do is refuse to sign their waver and produce your own that says they are responsible if any injury occurs.
That will be the end of the FCE. I know somene who did that!! And it was called off. Because, they refused to sign the liability thing!!
ACC cannot force you to attend.
Thanks MG for your post.
0

#11 User is offline   Gloria Mitchell 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 98
  • Joined: 14-February 06

Posted 01 February 2008 - 01:46 AM

View PostSparrow, on Jan 31 2008, 10:41 PM, said:

The ombubdsman did declare that noone has to attend these and it is somewhere , the ruling up on forum.
They make you sign that you will not hold them liable for any injury from the FCE>
Well, what you do is refuse to sign their waver and produce your own that says they are responsible if any injury occurs.
That will be the end of the FCE. I know somene who did that!! And it was called off. Because, they refused to sign the liability thing!!
ACC cannot force you to attend.
Thanks MG for your post.



Contact Acclaim Otago.....there is a letter that states FCE cannot be enforced on claimants.....I do have a copy somewhere..but my scanner won't work for some reason.

Can someone pull this up for the claimant please.

Gloria
0

#12 User is offline   freefallnz 

  • Member
  • PipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 11
  • Joined: 29-June 04

Posted 01 February 2008 - 11:13 AM

Quote

Functional Capacity Evalutaion Tests

The Office of the Ombudsman has recommended that :---

1 ACC apologise to a claimant for requiring the claimant to undergo an FCE test; and

2 ACC refrain from requiring claimants to undergo FCE as part of an assessment of capacity to work or vocab independence; and

3 ACC revise its procedures so as to make it clear to claimants that they are fully entitled to refuse - without penalty of any kind to undertake exercises or tests in the course of FCE if they consider that those excercises or tests may be unsafe or undesirable or may carry the risk of re-injury or may increase the claimants pain level.
http://accforum.org/...owtopic=195&hl=

+

Quote

Did any of you note in that link that the FCE is for claimants who have a FIT FOR SELECTED WORK CLEARANCE.

If you have an unfit for work med cert then you must not be coerced into doing an FCE.
]#20

But it would be good to sight the "official ombudsman letter" !

Also the Corrupt Corporations Guidelines
0

#13 User is offline   Alan Thomas 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 10813
  • Joined: 10-June 06

Posted 01 February 2008 - 12:50 PM

If a functional capacity evaluation test is done properly with appropriately qualified assessors can be quite useful tool to measure the progress of rehabilitation. Unfortunately like most other things the ACC had taken something good and corrupted it.

These tests are done properly however horrendously expensive if they are to be used as talk to determine the end of incapacity and obviously the ACC has not even come remotely close to utilising this very good and objective testing procedures and equipment to learn true information.

The problem is when someone sits about to ask question is now on to deliver inappropriate or misleading information so as to reduce liability they are in fact conspiring to commit fraud. If the document is likely to be destined for a judicial forum then it is perversion of the course of justice even though the document they had never seen the inside of a court room. The level of criminal activity mindset and behaviour of the ACC in this regard is absolutely horrendous.

Having said that I went along and got a functional capacity and evaluation on my own with the ACC principal contract doing the assessment. I also obtained a medical report from Dr Emrys anotheer one of their contracted assessors. The other day I have just received one of a series of occupational assessments.

Information is good but the information must be quality information. Personally I like the concept of functional assessment and evaluation but would prefer my treatment provider to supervise so as to prevent the falsification of the procedure in order to deliver misleading information.
0

#14 User is offline   Not Waddie 

  • Newbie
  • Pip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 5
  • Joined: 24-December 07

Posted 01 February 2008 - 01:29 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on Feb 1 2008, 01:50 PM, said:

If a functional capacity evaluation test is done properly with appropriately qualified assessors can be quite useful tool to measure the progress of rehabilitation. Unfortunately like most other things the ACC had taken something good and corrupted it.

These tests are done properly however horrendously expensive if they are to be used as talk to determine the end of incapacity and obviously the ACC has not even come remotely close to utilising this very good and objective testing procedures and equipment to learn true information.

The problem is when someone sits about to ask question is now on to deliver inappropriate or misleading information so as to reduce liability they are in fact conspiring to commit fraud. If the document is likely to be destined for a judicial forum then it is perversion of the course of justice even though the document they had never seen the inside of a court room. The level of criminal activity mindset and behaviour of the ACC in this regard is absolutely horrendous.

Having said that I went along and got a functional capacity and evaluation on my own with the ACC principal contract doing the assessment. I also obtained a medical report from Dr Emrys anotheer one of their contracted assessors. The other day I have just received one of a series of occupational assessments.

Information is good but the information must be quality information. Personally I like the concept of functional assessment and evaluation but would prefer my treatment provider to supervise so as to prevent the falsification of the procedure in order to deliver misleading information.


Gee Alan I think I agree.
0

#15 User is offline   Bill Birch 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 166
  • Joined: 04-June 08

Posted 07 June 2011 - 02:39 PM

View PostSparrow, on 31 January 2008 - 09:41 PM, said:

The ombubdsman did declare that noone has to attend these and it is somewhere , the ruling up on forum.
They make you sign that you will not hold them liable for any injury from the FCE>
Well, what you do is refuse to sign their waver and produce your own that says they are responsible if any injury occurs.
That will be the end of the FCE. I know somene who did that!! And it was called off. Because, they refused to sign the liability thing!!
ACC cannot force you to attend.
Thanks MG for your post.


For the record; the FCE is an assessment ACC can reasonably require and playing silly buggers wont stop weekly compensation being suspended. See the following District Court decision.
http://www.nzlii.org...ry=FCE%20murray
0

#16 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 07 June 2011 - 06:42 PM

View PostAlan Thomas, on 01 February 2008 - 12:50 PM, said:

If a functional capacity evaluation test is done properly with appropriately qualified assessors can be quite useful tool to measure the progress of rehabilitation. Unfortunately like most other things the ACC had taken something good and corrupted it.

These tests are done properly however horrendously expensive if they are to be used as talk to determine the end of incapacity and obviously the ACC has not even come remotely close to utilising this very good and objective testing procedures and equipment to learn true information.

The problem is when someone sits about to ask question is now on to deliver inappropriate or misleading information so as to reduce liability they are in fact conspiring to commit fraud. If the document is likely to be destined for a judicial forum then it is perversion of the course of justice even though the document they had never seen the inside of a court room. The level of criminal activity mindset and behaviour of the ACC in this regard is absolutely horrendous.

Having said that I went along and got a functional capacity and evaluation on my own with the ACC principal contract doing the assessment. I also obtained a medical report from Dr Emrys anotheer one of their contracted assessors. The other day I have just received one of a series of occupational assessments.

Information is good but the information must be quality information. Personally I like the concept of functional assessment and evaluation but would prefer my treatment provider to supervise so as to prevent the falsification of the procedure in order to deliver misleading information.


When declining to attend a FCE one should read this post and the one before this post.

Declining to do activities because it causes further incapacity is different to declining a FCE.

The ACC Guideline to undertake an FCE is nothing more than requesting all claimants to carry out the same activities to carry out an Exit programme.
0

#17 User is offline   Witchiepoo 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 108
  • Joined: 27-January 05

Posted 08 June 2011 - 09:08 AM

2011 and they are still writing in IRP's that they will be sending claimant for an FCE ?
0

#18 User is offline   doppelganger 

  • Advanced Member
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1740
  • Joined: 19-September 03

Posted 08 June 2011 - 10:44 AM

View PostWitchiepoo, on 08 June 2011 - 09:08 AM, said:

2011 and they are still writing in IRP's that they will be sending claimant for an FCE ?


Yep!!!!!! and claimants still getting sucked in.
0

Share this topic:


Page 1 of 1
  • You cannot start a new topic
  • You cannot reply to this topic

1 User(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users