Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Evaluation of a Short-form Functional Capacity Evaluation: Less may be Best

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE) contributes to clinical decisions regarding fitness-for-work and may improve return-to-work outcomes. However, FCE is a burdensome clinical tool in terms of time and cost. We evaluated the effectiveness of a short-form FCE protocol.

Methods

A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted. Data were collected on all claimants undergoing FCE at Alberta’s workers’ compensation rehabilitation facility. Twenty-three clinicians who were trained and experienced with FCE were randomized to either an intervention or control group. The intervention group was trained to conduct short-form FCE and used this protocol through the trial’s duration, while the control group continued standard FCE procedures. Data on subject characteristics, administrative outcomes (days to suspension of time loss benefits, days to claim closure, and future recurrence) and claimant satisfaction were extracted from the WCB-Alberta computer databases. Clinicians logged time taken to complete assessments. Analysis included examining differences between groups using independent samples t tests, Cox and logistic regression.

Results

Subjects included 372 claimants of whom 173 were tested with short-form FCE. Subjects were predominantly employed (64%) males (69%) with chronic musculoskeletal conditions (median duration 252 days). Administrative recovery outcomes were similar between groups as were claimant satisfaction ratings. No statistically significant or clinically relevant differences were observed on these outcomes between groups. A 43% reduction in functional assessment time was seen.

Conclusion

A short-form FCE appears to reduce time of assessment while not affecting recovery outcomes when compared to standard FCE administration. Such a protocol may be an efficient option for therapists performing fitness-for-work assessments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. King, P. M., Tuckwell, N., & Barrett, T. E. (1998). A critical review of functional capacity evaluations. Physical Therapy, 78, 852–866.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  2. Gouttebarge, V., Wind, H., & Kuijer, P. P. et al. (2004). Reliability and validity of functional capacity evaluation methods: A systematic review with reference to Blankenship system, Ergos work simulator, Ergo-Kit and Isernhagen work system. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health, 77, 527–537.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Gross, D. P., & Battié, M. C. (2005). Functional capacity evaluation performance does not predict sustained return to work in claimants with chronic back pain. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 15, 285–294.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Ruan, C. M., Haig, A. J., & Geisser, M. E. et al. (2001). Functional capacity evaluations in persons with spinal disorders: predicting poor outcomes on the Functional Assessment Screening Test (FAST). Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 11, 119–132.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Gross, D. P., Battié, M. C., & Asante, A. (2006). Development and validation of a short-form functional capacity evaluation for use in claimants with low back disorders. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 16, 53–62.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Gross, D. P., Battié, M. C., & Cassidy, J. D. (2004). The prognostic value of functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain: part 1: timely return to work. Spine, 29, 914–919.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Matheson, L. N., Isernhagen, S. J., & Hart, D. L. (2002). Relationships among lifting ability, grip force, and return to work. Physical Therapy, 82, 249–256.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Cutler, R. B., Fishbain, D. A., & Steele-Rosomoff, R. et al. (2003). Relationships between functional capacity measures and baseline psychological measures in chronic pain patients. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 13, 249–258.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Gross D. P., & Battié M. C. (2006). Does functional capacity evaluation predict recovery in workers compensation claimants with upper extremity disorders? Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 63(6), 404–410.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Puffer, S., Torgerson, D. J., & Watson, J. (2005). Cluster randomized controlled trials. Journal of Evaluation in Clinical Practice, 11, 479–483.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Donner, A., & Klar, N. (2004). Pitfalls of and controversies in cluster randomization trials. American Journal of Public Health, 94, 416–422.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Voaklander, D. C., Beaulne, A. P., & Lessard, R. A. (1995). Factors related to outcome following a work hardening program. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 5, 71–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Isernhagen, S. J. (1992). Functional capacity evaluation: rationale, procedure, utility of the kinesiophysical approach. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 2, 157–168.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Klar, N., & Donner, A. (2001). Current and future challenges in the design and analysis of cluster randomization trials. Statistics in Medicine, 20, 3729–3740.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Eldridge, S., Cryer, C., & Feder, G. et al. (2001). Sample size calculations for intervention trials in primary care randomizing by primary care group: an empirical illustration from one proposed intervention trial. Statistics in Medicine, 20, 367–376.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Gross, D. P., & Battié, M. C. (2002). Reliability of safe maximum lifting determinations of a functional capacity evaluation. Physical Therapy, 82, 364–371.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  17. Brouwer, S., Reneman, M. F., & Dijkstra, P. U. et al. (2003). Test-retest reliability of the Isernhagen work systems functional capacity evaluation in patients with chronic low back pain. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 13, 207–218.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Reneman, M. F., Dijkstra, P. U., & Westmaas, M. et al. (2002). Test-retest reliability of lifting and carrying in a 2-day functional capacity evaluation. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 12, 269–275.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Tait, R. C., Chibnall, J. T., & Krause, S. (1990). The pain disability index: psychometric properties. Pain, 40, 171–182.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Finch, E., Brooks, D., & Stratford, P. et al. (2002). Physical rehabilitation outcome measures: A guide to enhanced clinical decision making (2nd edn). Toronto: Canadian Physiotherapy Association.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Ware, J. E., & Gandek, B. (1994). The SF-36 Health Survey: development and use in mental health research at the IQLOA project. International Journal of Mental Health, 23, 73.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Chatman, A. B., Hyams, S. P., & Neel, J. M. et al. (1997). The Patient-Specific Functional Scale: Measurement properties in patients with knee dysfunction. Physical Therapy, 77, 820–829.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Gross, D. P., & Battié, M. C. (2005). Work-related recovery expectations and the prognosis of chronic low back pain within a workers’ compensation setting. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 47, 428–433.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Amick, B. C., III, Habeck, R. V., & Hunt, A. et al. (2000). Measuring the impact of organizational behaviours on work disability prevention and management. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 10, 21–38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Gross, D. P., & Battié, M. C. (2005). Predicting timely recovery and recurrence following multidisciplinary rehabilitation in patients with compensated low back pain. Spine, 30, 235–240.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Cole, D. C., Mondloch, M. V., & Hogg-Johnson, S. (2002). Listening to injured workers: How recovery expectations predict outcomes-a prospective study. CMAJ, 166, 749–754.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Cote, P., Hogg-Johnson, S., & Cassidy, J. D. et al. (2001). The association between neck pain intensity, physical functioning, depressive symptomatology and time-to-claim-closure after whiplash. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 54, 275–286.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  28. Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (1999). Applied survival analysis: Regression modeling of time to event data. (1 edn.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Hosmer, D. W., & Lemeshow, S. (2000). Applied logistic regression. (2nd edn.). New York: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Crook, J., Milner, R., & Schultz, I. Z. et al. (2002). Determinants of occupational disability following a low back injury: A critical review of the literature. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation, 12, 277–295.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Krause, N., Dasinger, L. K., & Deegan, L. J. et al. (1999). Alternative approaches for measuring duration of work disability after low back injury based on administrative workers’ compensation data. American Journal of Industrial Medicine, 35, 604–618.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Funding was received from the Clinical Research Partnership Fund sponsored by the Alberta Physiotherapy Association and University of Alberta’s Department of Physical Therapy. WCB-Alberta/ Millard Health assisted with data acquisition and study implementation.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Physical Therapy, University of Alberta, 2-50 Corbett Hall, Edmonton, AB, Canada, T6G 2G4

    Douglas P. Gross & Michele C. Battié

  2. Workers’ Compensation Board Alberta/Millard Health, Edmonton, AB, Canada

    Douglas P. Gross

  3. Peter Lougheed Centre, Calgary Health Region, Calgary, AB, Canada

    Alexander K. Asante

Authors
  1. Douglas P. Gross
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Michele C. Battié
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alexander K. Asante
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Douglas P. Gross.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Gross, D.P., Battié, M.C. & Asante, A.K. Evaluation of a Short-form Functional Capacity Evaluation: Less may be Best. J Occup Rehabil 17, 422–435 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-007-9087-y

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-007-9087-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation