No evidence for combining psychological and physical impairments to determine WPI

There is no scientific evidence to support the combining of ratings of psychological and physical impairments to determine a whole person impairment, reiterated Dr. Arthur Ameis, physiatrist and founder of the Multidisciplinary Disciplinary Assessment Centre, during a seminar hosted by the Canadian Independent Adjusters’ Association, Ontario Chapter in Toronto on May 13.
Ameis sat on the eight-person medical expert panel tasked by the Financial Services Commission of Ontario with drafting a proposed definition for catastrophic impairment under Ontario’s Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule. The panel’s proposed definition was released for comment on April 15.
The panel applied a scientific approach to defining catastrophic impairment, and in doing so, were unable to find scientific evidence to support the method of calculating impairment set out in the controversial 2004 Ontario Superior Court case Desbiens v. Mordini.
“The AMA Guides do not give a way to combined psychological and physical and we decided we had to put that clearly in the definition,” Ameis said. “It’s not the intention of the AMA Guides [to combine the physical with the psychological] it shouldn’t be misinterpreted as such.”