A Computerized Medical Standards System to Help Place Impaired Employees

Abstract:

The paper describes a knowledge-distribution system that supports decisions on placement of impaired employees. The knowledge base consists of job profiles and medical profiles. The job profiles list tasks and the physical abilities they require. Twenty-one abilities describe the task demands. Active workers rated the exertion, frequency and importance of the physical ability required for each task. Thirty-nine work conditions were rated this way. Using identical scales, experts assessed the impact of impairments on the physical abilities of individuals and the tolerance of work conditions. The screening matches the job profile against the impairment profile. This process has been automated. The program lists tasks and work conditions that may compromise an impaired employee. This information can be used to accommodate employees, restrict duties or design a rehabilitation program. Also, the paper discusses the impact of the system on the operations of medical services within an organization.

Keywords:

Job Analysis - Knowledge Bases - Decision-Support System - Occupational Health-Information Systems - Personnel Staffing and Scheduling Systems

• References

• 1 Hogan IC, Ogden GD, Fleishman EA. Assessing Physical Requirements for Establishing Medical Standards in Selected Benchmark Jobs. Technical Report. Washington DC: Advanced Research Resources Organization; June 1978
• 2 Barr A. Knowledge distribution systems. PC AI 1990; 4: 26-73.
• 3 Van der Vleuten CPM, Newbie DI. How can we test clinical reasoning?. Lancet 1995; 345: 1032-34.
• 4 Shadbolt N, Burton M. Knowledge elicitation: a systematic approach. In: Wilson JR, Corlett EN. eds. Evaluation of Human Work. (2nd ed).. London: Taylor & Francis; 1995: 406-40.
• 5 Fleishmann EA, Reilly ME. Handbook of Human Abilities. Palo Alto CA: Consulting Psychologists Press; 1992
• 6 Fleishman EA, Mumford MD. Evaluating classifications of job behaviors: A construct validation of the ability requirement scales. Personnel Psychology 1991; 44: 523-75.
• 7 Nylander SW, Carmean G. The Medical Standards Project Final Report. San Bernardino County, Ca: Personnel Division; 1984
• 8 Frey W, Nieuwenhuijsen E. The ERTOMIS assessment method. In: Berkowitz M. ed. Forging Linkages. New York: Rehabilitation International; 1990: 121-56.
• 9 De Kort WLAM, Fransman LG, Van Dijk FJH. Preemployment medical examinations in a large occupational health service. Scand J Work Environ Health 1991; 17: 392-7.
• 10 Kilbom Å. Assessment of physical exposure in relation to work-related musculoskeletal disorders – what information can be obtained from systematic observations?. Scand J Work Environ Health 1994; 20: 30-45 (special issue).
• 11 Meyer M, Curley K. Expert system success models. Datamation 1989; 25: 35.
• 12 De Kort WLAM, Post Uiterweer HW, Van Dijk FJH. Agreement on medical fitness for a job. Scand J Work Environ Health 1992; 18: 246-51.
• 13 Szladow A, Ziarko W. Rough Sets: Working with imperfect data. AI Expert July 1993; 36-41.
• 14 Keyes J. Auditing expert systems. PC AI 1992; 6: 48-51.
• 15 Bryant J. Expert system follow-up. PC AI 1990; 4: 36-9 56.
• 16 Martin JM. et al. Surveillance of occupational risks using job-exposure matrices. Meth Inform Med 1991; 30 (02) 132-7.
• 17 Brauchler R, Landau K. Implementation of an epidemiological early-warning system by using rule induction algorithms. In: Mattila M, Karwowski W. eds. Computer Applications in Ergonomics, Occupational Safety and Health. Amsterdam: North-Holland; 1992: 249-54.
• 18 World Health Organization. International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps ICIDH. Geneva: WHO; 1993