Dr. Mamigonian's Assessment: An Analysis Of The AMA Guides
repeated three times with different hands during the examination and the values are recorded and later compared.
In addition, the AMA Guides further note the test repeated in intervals during an examination are considered to be reliable if there is less than 20% variation in the readings. If there is more than 20% variation in the readings, one may assume the individual is not exerting full effort. Here, the applicant’s measurement resulted in the maximum of 20 kg and a minimum of 4 kg, which has well exceeded the 20% variation, thus the measurement could not be reliable.
Third, I have seen case law where the doctor is required to explain in detail why the decrease in grip strength is directly a result of the injury. The AMA Guides provided an example of this situation, such as the loss of strength due to a severe muscle tear that healed leaving a palpable muscle …show more content…
Mamigonian’s apportionment opinion. Dr. Mamigonian was under the impression the applicant has no similar pathology that is pre-existing. However, based on the subpoenaed records, we have received, this is not true. The applicant clearly had a loss of grip strength from his prior 2002 claim against Mack Fish Hatchery. The applicant settled the 2002 claim via Stipulations with Request for Award at 18% based on the Agreed Medical Examiner, Dr. Frederick Newton’s report dated September 15, 2004. Dr. Newton specifically noted the applicant’s current complaint as follows:
“While he [the applicant] can hold a pen or pencil to write his name, he cannot grip tightly for longer than a minute or two. He has had groceries drop suddenly from his hand. He can hold a cup of coffee for less than two minutes. When he needs to move an item such as a box that weights more than 20 pounds, he pushes rather than lift it.”
Dr. Newton further acknowledges in his objective findings of disability on Page 7 of his report as “reduction in dominant right grip strength clinically estimated at
In addition, the AMA Guides further note the test repeated in intervals during an examination are considered to be reliable if there is less than 20% variation in the readings. If there is more than 20% variation in the readings, one may assume the individual is not exerting full effort. Here, the applicant’s measurement resulted in the maximum of 20 kg and a minimum of 4 kg, which has well exceeded the 20% variation, thus the measurement could not be reliable.
Third, I have seen case law where the doctor is required to explain in detail why the decrease in grip strength is directly a result of the injury. The AMA Guides provided an example of this situation, such as the loss of strength due to a severe muscle tear that healed leaving a palpable muscle …show more content…
Mamigonian’s apportionment opinion. Dr. Mamigonian was under the impression the applicant has no similar pathology that is pre-existing. However, based on the subpoenaed records, we have received, this is not true. The applicant clearly had a loss of grip strength from his prior 2002 claim against Mack Fish Hatchery. The applicant settled the 2002 claim via Stipulations with Request for Award at 18% based on the Agreed Medical Examiner, Dr. Frederick Newton’s report dated September 15, 2004. Dr. Newton specifically noted the applicant’s current complaint as follows:
“While he [the applicant] can hold a pen or pencil to write his name, he cannot grip tightly for longer than a minute or two. He has had groceries drop suddenly from his hand. He can hold a cup of coffee for less than two minutes. When he needs to move an item such as a box that weights more than 20 pounds, he pushes rather than lift it.”
Dr. Newton further acknowledges in his objective findings of disability on Page 7 of his report as “reduction in dominant right grip strength clinically estimated at