Computer-aided multiple standard-based functional evaluation and medical reporting system

• US 20120022884A1
• Filed: 07/26/2010
• Published: 01/26/2012
• Est. Priority Date: 07/26/2010
• Status: Active Grant

• Current Assignee: Michael Chillemi
• Original Assignee: Michael Chillemi
• Inventors: Chillemi, Michael
• Granted Patent: US 9,940,437 B2
• Time in Patent Office: Days
• US Class Current: 705/2
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 2560/0223 of calibration, e.g. protocols for calibrating sensors
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/1075 for measuring dimensions by non-invasive methods, e.g. for determining thickness of tissue layer A61B8/0858 takes precedence
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/1121 Determining geometric values, e.g. centre of rotation or angular range of movement
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/4566 Evaluating the spine A61B5/4561 takes precedence
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/4576 Evaluating the shoulder
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/458 Evaluating the elbow
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/743 Displaying an image simultaneously with additional graphical information, e.g. symbols, charts, function plots
• CPC Class Codes: A61B 5/7435 Displaying user selection data, e.g. icons in a graphical user interface
• CPC Class Codes: G06F 3/048 Interaction techniques based on graphical user interfaces [GUI]
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 15/00 ICT specially adapted for medical reports, e.g. generation or transmission thereof
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 40/63 for local operation
• CPC Class Codes: G16H 50/30 for calculating health indices; for individual health risk assessment

Abstract

A method of performing an objective functional evaluation of a person'"'"'s physical capacity comprises of a computer program particularly designed to amass and assess test data in accordance with a selected standard. A wide variety of evaluation protocols are incorporated to lead an operator in a step-by-step process. The method includes special testing tools, many of which have been modified to input data directly into the computer diagnostic program. The interface may be a wired or a wireless connection. The software program may use an algorithm to calculate a coefficient of variation for the multiple trials of a test, using the entered data, to providing a determination of validity of the trials. A second algorithm calculates an average result of the condition-specific protocol of tests, after which the software program correlates those average results to a database of normative standards to compute an impairment rating.

Claims

1. A method of performing an objective functional evaluation of a person'"'"'s condition comprising:

using a processor to perform at least a portion of one or more of the following steps;

(a) measuring distinct physical capabilities of a person utilizing one or more pieces of equipment;

(b) acquiring said measurements by using said equipment in multiple trials of a condition-specific protocol of tests, said protocol being selectively chosen from a database of options;

(c) data entry of said measurements into a software program running on said processor;

(d) said software program comprising an algorithm to calculate a coefficient of variation for said multiple trials using said entered data, said coefficient of variation providing a determination of validity of said trials;

(e) a second algorithm calculating an average result of said condition-specific protocol of tests; and

(f) said software program correlating said average results to a database of normative standards to compute an impairment rating.

2. The method of claim 1 wherein said selection from a database of options comprises one or more of:

selection from a pictorial image having discretely selectable body regions correlating to patient symptoms; and

selection from a menu listing of available protocols.

3. The method of claim 2 wherein said discretely selectable body regions comprise one or more of:

front body regions, back body regions, left side regions, right side regions, head region, shoulder region, elbow region, wrist region, hand region, hip region, knee region, ankle region, foot region, cervical region, thoracic region, lumbosacral region, and pelvic region.

4. The method of claim 3 wherein said condition-specific protocol is from the group consisting of:

an ankle/foot series profile, a cervical series profile, a cervical/elbow series profile, a cervical/wrist series profile, a carpal tunnel series profile, a hip series profile, a knee series profile, an elbow series profile, a lower extremity series profile, a lumbar series profile, a thoracic series profile, a shoulder series profile, an upper extremity series profile, or a functional screening series profile.

5. The method of claim 4 wherein said coefficient of variation comprises a difference computed as a percentage between a comparison value and measurements in successive trials of said multiple trials.

6. The method of claim 2 wherein said multiple trials comprise 3 successive trials out of a total of 6 trials.

7. The method of claim 6 wherein said comparison value equals a median measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

8. The method of claim 6 wherein said comparison value equals a mean measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

9. The method of claim 6 wherein said comparison value equals a largest measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

10. The method of claim 7, 8, or 9, wherein when said calculated coefficient of variation for successive trials is approximately 15% or less, said trial results are indicative of validity, reproducibility, and consistency of effort.

11. The method of claim 7, 8, or 9 wherein, when said test is a range of motion test, an indication of validity for successive trials is approximately 5 degrees or less between said comparison value and said measurements from said three successive trials.

12. The method of claim 5 wherein said average results and said coefficient of variation are arranged in a scannable format to accommodate ready identification by a doctor of functional loss.

13. The method of claim 2 wherein said scannable format comprises a table of said average results and said normative standards.

14. The method of claim 13 wherein said scannable format comprises a color coded bar chart of said average results and said normative standards.

15. The method of claim 14 wherein said algorithm provides instructions to generate one or more of:

on-screen display of said scannable format; and

a printable report of said scannable format.

16. The method of claim 15 wherein said normative standard comprises one or more of:

national institute of occupational safety and health data;

activities of daily living;

the 2^nd edition of the guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment;

the 3^rd edition of the guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment;

the 4^th edition of the guides to the evaluation of permanent impairment;

the 5^th edition of the evaluation of permanent impairment; and

the 6^th edition of the evaluation of permanent impairment.

17. The method of claim 16 wherein said data is entered manually into said algorithm.

18. The method of claim 17 wherein said equipment comprises an equipment-to-computer interface to input data directly into said algorithm.

19. The method of claim 18 wherein said equipment-to-computer interface comprises wiring of one or more pieces of said equipment to said processor.

20. The method of claim 19 wherein said equipment-to-computer interface comprises one or more pieces of said equipment automatically transmitting data wirelessly to said processor.

21. The method of claim 20 wherein said algorithm permits calibration of said equipment.

22. The method of claim 21 wherein said equipment permits mobile evaluations by a single person.

23. The method of claim 22 wherein said method quantifies muscle weakness and loss of range of motion to objectively identify when a person is misrepresenting their true physical ability.

24. The method of claim 23 wherein said method permits identification of nerve injuries.

25. The method of claim 24 wherein said method quantifies rehabilitation improvement.

26. The method of claim 25 wherein said method provides legally defensible documentation for litigation.

27. The method of claim 26 wherein said method establishes medical necessity for treatment.

28. The method of claim 27 wherein method tracks patient progress during stages of care.

29. The method of claim 28 wherein method identifies one or more of regional impairment and whole-person impairment.

30. A method of performing a functional evaluation to appraise a person'"'"'s physical ability comprising the steps of:

using one or more processors to execute instructions retained in machine-readable media to perform at least some portion of the following steps;

(a) measuring physical aptitude of a person utilizing one or more pieces of equipment;

(b) taking said measurement using said equipment in multiple trials of a condition-specific protocol of tests, said protocol being selectively chosen from a database of options;

(c) data entry of said measurements into said processor;

(d) said instruction comprising an algorithm, said algorithm utilizing said entered data to calculate a coefficient of variation for said multiple trials, said coefficient of variation establishing validity of said trials;

(e) said instruction comprising a second algorithm, said second algorithm calculating an average result of said condition-specific protocol of tests; and

(f) said instruction comprising a third algorithm, said third algorithm correlating said average result to a database of published population norms to compute an impairment rating.

31. The method of claim 30 wherein said selection from a database of options comprises one or more of:

selection from a pictorial image having discretely selectable body regions correlating to patient symptoms; and

selection from a menu listing of available protocols.

32. The method of claim 31 wherein said discretely selectable body regions comprise one or more of:

front body regions, back body regions, left side regions, right side regions, head region, shoulder region, elbow region, wrist region, hand region, hip region, knee region, ankle region, foot region, cervical region, thoracic region, lumbosacral region, and pelvic region.

33. The method of claim 32 wherein said condition-specific protocol is from the group consisting of:

an ankle/foot series profile, a cervical series profile, a cervical/elbow series profile, a cervical/wrist series profile, a carpal tunnel series profile, a hip series profile, a knee series profile, an elbow series profile, a lower extremity series profile, a lumbar series profile, a thoracic series profile, a shoulder series profile, an upper extremity series profile, or a functional screening series profile.

34. An article of manufacture comprising a program storage medium having computer readable code embodied therein, said computer readable code being configured for completing a functional evaluation and an appraisal of a person'"'"'s degree of impairment, said article of manufacturing comprising:

(a) said computer readable code accepting measurements of one or more distinct physical capacities of a person;

(b) taking said measurements utilizing one or more pieces of equipment in multiple trials of a condition-specific protocol of tests, said protocol being selectively chosen from a database of options;

(c) entering said measurements into said article of manufacture;

(d) said computer readable code utilizing said entered data in calculating a coefficient of variation for said multiple trials, said coefficient of variation establishing predictive validity of said trials;

(e) said computer readable code calculating an average result of said condition-specific protocol of tests; and

(f) said computer readable code correlating said average result to a database of normative standards in computing an impairment rating.

35. The article of claim 34 wherein said selection from a database of options comprises one or more of selection from a pictorial image having discretely selectable body regions correlating to patient symptoms;

and selection from a menu listing of available protocols.

36. The article of claim 35 wherein said discretely selectable body regions comprise one or more of:

front body regions, back body regions, left side regions, right side regions, head region, shoulder region, elbow region, wrist region, hand region, hip region, knee region, ankle region, foot region, cervical region, thoracic region, lumbosacral region, and pelvic region.

37. The article of claim 36 wherein said condition-specific protocol is from the group consisting of:

an ankle/foot series profile, a cervical series profile, a cervical/elbow series profile, a cervical/wrist series profile, a carpal tunnel series profile, a hip series profile, a knee series profile, an elbow series profile, a lower extremity series profile, a lumbar series profile, a thoracic series profile, a shoulder series profile, an upper extremity series profile, or a functional screening series profile.

38. The article of claim 37 wherein said coefficient of variation comprises a difference computed as a percentage between a comparison value and measurements in successive trials of said multiple trials.

39. The article of claim 38 wherein said multiple trials comprise 3 successive trials out of a total of 6 trials.

40. The article of claim 39 wherein said comparison value equals a median measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

41. The article of claim 39 wherein said comparison value equals a mean measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

42. The article of claim 39 wherein said comparison value equals a largest measurement of said measurements from said three successive trials.

43. The article of claim 40, 41, or 42 wherein, when said calculated coefficient of variation for successive trials is approximately 15% or less, said trial results are indicative of validity, reproducibility, and consistency of effort.

44. The article of claim 40, 41, or 42 wherein, when said test is a range of motion test, an indication of validity for successive trials is approximately 5 degrees or less between said comparison value and said measurements from said three successive trials.

45. A computer-implemented method for evaluating a person'"'"'s physical impairment comprising:

(a) measuring aspects of a person'"'"'s physical ability utilizing one or more pieces of equipment;

(b) taking said measurements using said equipment in multiple trials of a condition-specific protocol of tests, said protocol being selectively chosen from a database of options;

(c) data entry of said measurements into a window being displayed on a screen by a software program running on said computer;

(d) said software program comprising an algorithm, said algorithm utilizing said entered data to calculate a coefficient of variation for said multiple trials, said coefficient of variation providing a determination of validity of said trials; and

(e) said software program correlating said average results to a database of normative standards to compute an impairment rating.