High Rate of Error and Inconsistency for PPD ratings


The March/April 2010 edition of the AMA Guides Newsletter reports that a review of over 6,000 cases, mostly from California, resulted in 80% of them questioned by expert rating reviewers. For the very small number of Nevada cases reviewed for this study , the error rate was much less, with an average difference of 3% whole person impairment. This study confirms what most attorneys who represent injured workers know about rating evaluations. There is a tremendous difference in ratings by the various rating doctors authorized to perform ratings in Nevada, even though the rating doctors should theoretically reach the same numbers by following the methods in the Guides.

Please see full article below for more information.

LOADING PDF: If there are any problems, click here to download the file.

Written by:

Published In:

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Virginia L. Hunt, Law Office of Virginia Hunt | Attorney Advertising

Don't miss a thing! Build a custom news brief:

Read fresh new writing on compliance, cybersecurity, Dodd-Frank, whistleblowers, social media, hiring & firing, patent reform, the NLRB, Obamacare, the SEC…

…or whatever matters the most to you. Follow authors, firms, and topics on JD Supra.

Create your news brief now - it's free and easy »

All the intelligence you need, in one easy email:

Great! Your first step to building an email digest of JD Supra authors and topics. Log in with LinkedIn so we can start sending your digest...

Sign up for your custom alerts now, using LinkedIn ›

* With LinkedIn, you don't need to create a separate login to manage your free JD Supra account, and we can make suggestions based on your needs and interests. We will not post anything on LinkedIn in your name.