Rafael Cordero, Haley Ponce, David Ring, Melissa Tonn, Sina Ramtin
{"title":"A Debiasing Checklist Has the Potential to Improve Efficiency, Effectiveness, and Outcomes in Claims of Work Injury.","authors":"Rafael Cordero, Haley Ponce, David Ring, Melissa Tonn, Sina Ramtin","doi":"10.1097/JOM.0000000000003368","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The aim of the study was to identify the most frequent deviations and factors associated with the number of deviations from a work injury debiasing checklist among claims referred for peer review.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We retrospectively reviewed 141 work injury claims sent to a musculoskeletal specialist for additional scrutiny and counted deviations from a checklist developed to catch common pitfalls in evaluation and treatment.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Nearly all claims had a deviation (99%) including mislabeling of noninjury pathophysiology as an injury (92%), overlooking mental health (91%), and work restrictions in the absence of risk or incapacity (91%). There were no associations between the number of deviations from the checklist and any patient or clinician factors.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>A debiasing checklist has potential to help clinicians avoid common pitfalls in the care of claims of work injury.</p>","PeriodicalId":94100,"journal":{"name":"Journal of occupational and environmental medicine","volume":" ","pages":"e419-e423"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of occupational and environmental medicine","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JOM.0000000000003368","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/28 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective: The aim of the study was to identify the most frequent deviations and factors associated with the number of deviations from a work injury debiasing checklist among claims referred for peer review.
Methods: We retrospectively reviewed 141 work injury claims sent to a musculoskeletal specialist for additional scrutiny and counted deviations from a checklist developed to catch common pitfalls in evaluation and treatment.
Results: Nearly all claims had a deviation (99%) including mislabeling of noninjury pathophysiology as an injury (92%), overlooking mental health (91%), and work restrictions in the absence of risk or incapacity (91%). There were no associations between the number of deviations from the checklist and any patient or clinician factors.
Conclusions: A debiasing checklist has potential to help clinicians avoid common pitfalls in the care of claims of work injury.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
