Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2008

Open Access 01-12-2008 | Research article

Medico-legal reasoning in disability assessment: A focus group and validation study

Authors: WEL de Boer, P Donceel, S Brage, M Rus, JHBM Willems

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2008

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Decisions on disability pensions are based, among others, on medical reports. The way these medical assessments are performed is largely unclear. The aim of the study was to determine which grounds are used by social insurance physicians (SIPs) in these assessments and to determine if the identification of these grounds can help improve the quality of assessments in social insurance practice. The article describes a focus group study and a questionnaire study with SIPs in four different countries.

Method

Using focus group discussions of SIPs discussing the same case in Belgium, the Netherlands, Norway and Slovenia (N = 29) we determined the arguments and underlying grounds as used by the SIP's. We used a questionnaire study among other SIPs (N = 60) in the same countries to establish a first validation of these grounds.

Results

Grounds in the focus groups were comparable between the countries studied. The grounds were also recognized by SIPs who had not participated in the focus groups. SIPs agreed most on grounds with regard to the claimant's health condition, and about the claimant's duty to explore rehabilitation and work resumption, but less on accepting permanent incapacity when all options for treatment were exhausted.

Conclusion

Grounds that SIPs use refer to a limited group of key elements of disability evaluation. SIPs interpret disability in social insurance according to the handicapped role and strive at making their evaluation fair trials. ICF is relevant with regard to the health condition and to the process of evaluation. Identification of grounds is a valuable instrument for controlling the quality of disability evaluation. The grounds also appear to be internationally comparable which may enhance scientific study in this area.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Council of Europe: Assessing disability in Europe. Strasbourg. 2002 Council of Europe: Assessing disability in Europe. Strasbourg. 2002
2.
go back to reference Mabbet D, Bolderson H, Hvinden B: Definitions of disability in Europe: a comparative analysis. 2002, Uxbridge: Brunel University Mabbet D, Bolderson H, Hvinden B: Definitions of disability in Europe: a comparative analysis. 2002, Uxbridge: Brunel University
3.
go back to reference de Boer WEL, Besseling JJM, Willems JHBM: Organisation of disability evaluation in 15 countries. Pratiques et organisation des soins. 2007, 38: 205-217. de Boer WEL, Besseling JJM, Willems JHBM: Organisation of disability evaluation in 15 countries. Pratiques et organisation des soins. 2007, 38: 205-217.
4.
go back to reference Gordon G: Role theory and illness. 1966, New Haven: College and university press Gordon G: Role theory and illness. 1966, New Haven: College and university press
5.
go back to reference Waddell G, Aylward M: The scientific and conceptual basis of incapacity benefits. 2005, Norwich: TSO Waddell G, Aylward M: The scientific and conceptual basis of incapacity benefits. 2005, Norwich: TSO
6.
go back to reference Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Transforming Disability into Ability. Policies to Promote Work and Income Security for Disabled People. Paris. 2003 Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD): Transforming Disability into Ability. Policies to Promote Work and Income Security for Disabled People. Paris. 2003
7.
go back to reference Rezzvy G, Schönfelder W, Øiesvold T, Olstad R, Midré G: Between health care and social security–psychiatric patients and the disability pension system in Norway and Russia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007, 7: 128-10.1186/1472-6963-7-128.CrossRef Rezzvy G, Schönfelder W, Øiesvold T, Olstad R, Midré G: Between health care and social security–psychiatric patients and the disability pension system in Norway and Russia. BMC Health Serv Res. 2007, 7: 128-10.1186/1472-6963-7-128.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Stone D: The disabled state. 1985, London: MacMillan Stone D: The disabled state. 1985, London: MacMillan
9.
go back to reference Lipsky M: Street level bureaucracy. 1980, New York: Russel Sage Lipsky M: Street level bureaucracy. 1980, New York: Russel Sage
10.
go back to reference Meershoek A, Krumeich A, Vos R: Judging without criteria? Sickness certification in Dutch disability schemes. Sociology of Health and Illness. 2007, 29: 497-514.CrossRefPubMed Meershoek A, Krumeich A, Vos R: Judging without criteria? Sickness certification in Dutch disability schemes. Sociology of Health and Illness. 2007, 29: 497-514.CrossRefPubMed
11.
go back to reference Manaouil C, Graser M, Jarde O: Invalidity in the general health scheme. Presse Medicale. 2003, 32: 1622-6. Manaouil C, Graser M, Jarde O: Invalidity in the general health scheme. Presse Medicale. 2003, 32: 1622-6.
12.
go back to reference Ydreborg B, Ekberg K, Nilsson K: Swedish social insurance officers' experiences of difficulties in assessing applications for disability pensions–an interview study. BMC Public Health. 2007, 7: 128-10.1186/1471-2458-7-128.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Ydreborg B, Ekberg K, Nilsson K: Swedish social insurance officers' experiences of difficulties in assessing applications for disability pensions–an interview study. BMC Public Health. 2007, 7: 128-10.1186/1471-2458-7-128.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
13.
go back to reference Grönvik L: The fuzzy buzz word: conceptualisations of disability in disability research classics. Sociology of Health and Illness. 2007, 29: 750-66.CrossRefPubMed Grönvik L: The fuzzy buzz word: conceptualisations of disability in disability research classics. Sociology of Health and Illness. 2007, 29: 750-66.CrossRefPubMed
14.
go back to reference Nüchtern E: [The physician as expert evaluator. Aspects of an ambivalent role exemplified by the evaluation of claims in legal health insurance] [Article in German]. Offentliches Gesundheitswesen. 1990, 53: 1-6. Nüchtern E: [The physician as expert evaluator. Aspects of an ambivalent role exemplified by the evaluation of claims in legal health insurance] [Article in German]. Offentliches Gesundheitswesen. 1990, 53: 1-6.
15.
go back to reference Arrelöv B, Alexanderson K, Hagberg J, Löfgren A, Nilsson G, Ponzer S: Dealing with sickness certification – a survey of problems and strategies among general practitioners and orthopaedic surgeons. BMC Public Health. 2007, 7: 273-10.1186/1471-2458-7-273.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Arrelöv B, Alexanderson K, Hagberg J, Löfgren A, Nilsson G, Ponzer S: Dealing with sickness certification – a survey of problems and strategies among general practitioners and orthopaedic surgeons. BMC Public Health. 2007, 7: 273-10.1186/1471-2458-7-273.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
16.
go back to reference Swartling M, Peterson S, Wahlström R: Views on sick-listing practice among Swedish General Practitioners–a phenomenographic study. BMC Fam Pract. 2007, 8: 44-10.1186/1471-2296-8-44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Swartling M, Peterson S, Wahlström R: Views on sick-listing practice among Swedish General Practitioners–a phenomenographic study. BMC Fam Pract. 2007, 8: 44-10.1186/1471-2296-8-44.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Peric F: The general practitioner's role in the Swiss Invalidity Insurance. Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 2005, 94: 1345-7. Peric F: The general practitioner's role in the Swiss Invalidity Insurance. Schweiz Rundsch Med Prax. 2005, 94: 1345-7.
18.
go back to reference Toulmin SE: The use of arguments. (Updated version). 2003, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 92- Toulmin SE: The use of arguments. (Updated version). 2003, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 92-
19.
go back to reference Steenbeek R, de Boer WEL: [Mediprudence phase 2: 8 case descriptions] [report in Dutch]. 2006, Hoofddorp: TNO Quality of life Steenbeek R, de Boer WEL: [Mediprudence phase 2: 8 case descriptions] [report in Dutch]. 2006, Hoofddorp: TNO Quality of life
20.
go back to reference Gezondheidsraad : [Advice on mediprudence] [report in Dutch]. 2007, Den Haag: Gezondheidsraad Gezondheidsraad : [Advice on mediprudence] [report in Dutch]. 2007, Den Haag: Gezondheidsraad
21.
go back to reference Krohne K, Brage S: New rules meet established sickness certification practice: a focus-group study on the introduction of functional assessments in Norwegian primary care. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. 2007, 25: 172-7. 10.1080/02813430701267421.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Krohne K, Brage S: New rules meet established sickness certification practice: a focus-group study on the introduction of functional assessments in Norwegian primary care. Scandinavian Journal of Primary Health Care. 2007, 25: 172-7. 10.1080/02813430701267421.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
22.
go back to reference Commissie Arbeidsgeschiktheid: [Governmental committee on working capacity: Working on capacity]. [report in Dutch]. 2001, Den Haag: Ministerie SZW Commissie Arbeidsgeschiktheid: [Governmental committee on working capacity: Working on capacity]. [report in Dutch]. 2001, Den Haag: Ministerie SZW
23.
go back to reference Prinz C: European Disability Pension Policies. 11 Country Trends 1970–2002. 2003, Vienna: European Centre Prinz C: European Disability Pension Policies. 11 Country Trends 1970–2002. 2003, Vienna: European Centre
24.
go back to reference Waddell G, Aylward M, Sawney Ph: Back pain, incapacity for work and social security benefits. An international literature review and analysis. 2003, London: Royal Society of Medicine Press Waddell G, Aylward M, Sawney Ph: Back pain, incapacity for work and social security benefits. An international literature review and analysis. 2003, London: Royal Society of Medicine Press
25.
go back to reference Morgan D: Focus groups as qualitative research. 1988, London: Sage Morgan D: Focus groups as qualitative research. 1988, London: Sage
26.
go back to reference Kitzinger J: The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Interviewing Sage Benchmarks in social research methods. Edited by: Nigel Fielding. 2003, London: Sage, 1: 347-364. Kitzinger J: The methodology of focus groups: the importance of interaction between research participants. Interviewing Sage Benchmarks in social research methods. Edited by: Nigel Fielding. 2003, London: Sage, 1: 347-364.
27.
go back to reference de Boer WEL, Steenbeek R: [Pilot study on mediprudence: four case descriptions] [Report in Dutch]. 2005, Hoofddorp:L TNO Quality of Life de Boer WEL, Steenbeek R: [Pilot study on mediprudence: four case descriptions] [Report in Dutch]. 2005, Hoofddorp:L TNO Quality of Life
28.
go back to reference World Health Organisation (WHO): International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). 2001, Geneva: WHO; World Health Organisation (WHO): International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). 2001, Geneva: WHO;
29.
go back to reference Slebus FG, Sluiter JK, Kuijer PP, Willems JH, Frings-Dresen MH: Work-ability evaluation: a piece of cake or a hard nut to crack?. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2007, 29: 1295-300. 10.1080/09638280600976111.CrossRefPubMed Slebus FG, Sluiter JK, Kuijer PP, Willems JH, Frings-Dresen MH: Work-ability evaluation: a piece of cake or a hard nut to crack?. Disability and Rehabilitation. 2007, 29: 1295-300. 10.1080/09638280600976111.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Medico-legal reasoning in disability assessment: A focus group and validation study
Authors
WEL de Boer
P Donceel
S Brage
M Rus
JHBM Willems
Publication date
01-12-2008
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2008
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-8-335

Other articles of this Issue 1/2008

BMC Public Health 1/2008 Go to the issue