Evaluation of the impact of preplacement assessments is important given the resources companies and occupational health nurses allocate to screening and the ambiguity of the literature about the effectiveness of such assessments. This study examined the effects of preplacement assessments on employee injuries. All individuals screened by an occupational health clinic in the upper Midwest and given work restrictions during a 3 year period were identified as cases (n=67). Cases were matched with controls without work restrictions (n=264) on the basis of employer, gender, and job. Age was controlled for statistically. Chi-square analysis, used to test differences in percent distribution of injuries between cases and controls, found no statistically significant differences in musculoskeletal injuries between the groups. Work restrictions recommended as a result of preplacement assessments appear to protect vulnerable workers.
References
1.
Age Discrimination in Employment Act. (1967). Pub. L. 90–202. December 15, 1967. 81 Stat. 602 (Title 29 § 621 et seq.).
2.
Americans with Disabilities Act (1990). Pub. L. 101–336. July 26, 1990. 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq.
3.
AlexanderR.W., BrennanJ.C., MaidaA.S., & WalkerR.J. (1977). The value of preplacement medical examinations for nonhazardous light duty work.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 19(2), 107–112.
4.
AlexanderR.W., MaidaA.S., & WalkerR.J. (1975). The validity of reemployment medical evaluations.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 17(11), 687–692.
5.
AndstadtG.W. (1990). Occupational medicine forum.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 32(4), 295–296.
BigosS.J., BattleM.C, FisherL.D., HanssonT.H., SpenglerD.M., & NachemsonA.L. (1992a). A prospective evaluation of pre-employment screening methods for acute industrial back pain.Spine17(8), 922–926.
8.
BigosS.J., HansonT., CastilloR.N., BeecherP.J., & WortletM.D. (1992b). The value of preemployment roetgenographs for predicting acute back injury claims in chronic back pain disability.Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research, 283, 124–129.
9.
BorensteinM. (1994). The case for confidence intervals in controlled clinical trials.Controlled Clinical Trials, 15(5), 411–428.
10.
BorensteinM., RothsteinH., & CohenJ. (1997). Power and precision.Teaneck, NJ: Biostat.
11.
BuckleyM. (1994). Is the employee at a disadvantage?Occupational Health, 46(9), 305–307.
12.
Civil Rights Act. (1964). Pub. L. 88–352. July 26, 1964. 78 Stat. 241. (Title 28, § 1447; Title 42, § 1971; 1975a–1975d, 2000a et seq.)
13.
Civil Rights Act (1991). Pub. L. 102–166. November 21, 1991. 105 Stat 1071.
14.
Daly-OawendaD., KempinskiP.D., & HudsonE.K. (1986). Pre-employment screening: Its use and usefulness.AAOHN Journal, 34(6), 269–271.
15.
DeKortW.L.A.M., FransmanL.G., & Van DijkF.J.H. (1991). Pre-employment medical examinations in a large occupational health service.Scandinavian Journal of Work and Environmental Health, 6(17), 392–397.
16.
DeKortW., & Van DijkF. (1997). Preventive effectiveness of pre-employment medical assessments.Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 54(1), 1–6.
17.
DempseyP.G., BurdorfA.B., & WebsterB.S. (1997). The influence of personal variables on work-related low back disorders and implications for future research.Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 39(8), 748–759.
18.
GoldmanR.H. (1986). General occupational health history and examination.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 28(10), 967–973.
19.
HollemanW.L., & MaisonC.C. (1991). Pre-employment evaluations: Dilemmas for the family physician.Journal of the American Board of Family Practice, 4(2), 95–101.
20.
Immigration Reform and Control Act. (1986). Pub. L. 99–603. November 6, 1986. 100 Stat. 3359.
21.
LewyR.L. (1981). Occupational health programs for house staff physicians.JAMA, 246(13), 1432–1434.
22.
LewyR.L. (1985). Preplacement examination of temporary hospital workers.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 27(2), 122–124.
23.
LowenthalG. (1986). Medical enter worker preplacement screening: A follow-up study.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 28(6), 451–452.
Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. (1995). Minnesota workplace safety report: Occupational injuries and illnesses in Minnesota, 1993. Memo to Members of Minnesota Safety Council. March 2–3. St. Paul, MN: Department of Labor and Industry.
26.
Minnesota Department of Labor and Industry. (1997). Workplace safety and report: Occupational injuries and illnesses in Minnesota, 1995.St. Paul, MN: Department of Labor and Industry.
27.
National Safety Council. (1996). Accident facts.Itasca, IL: Author.
28.
Personnel Decisions. (1994). Research summary: Key functional assessment pre-employment screening battery as a predictor of job related injuries.Minneapolis, MN: Author.
29.
PruittR.H. (1995). Preplacement evaluation: Thriving within the ADA guidelines.AAOHN Journal, 43(3), 124–130.
30.
Rehabilitation Act. (1973). Pub. L. 93–112. September 26, 1973. 87 Stat. 355. (Title 29, §701 et seq.)
31.
United States Department of Health and Human Services. (1996). National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). DHHS(NIOSH) Publication No. 96–115.
32.
SchusslerT., KaminerA.J., PowerV.L., & PomperI.H. (1975). The preplacement examination.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 17(4), 254–257.
33.
ShepherdJ. (1992). Pre-employment examinations: How useful?Journal of the American Board of Family Practice, 5(6), 617–621.
34.
Statistics Netherlands, Voorburg/Heerlen. (1998). Key Figures Statistics Netherlands/Population. Available online at http://www.cbs.nl/eng/kfig/sbvo611x.htm.
Walch-KisselL.F. Unpublished data. Work restrictions identified during preplacement evaluation: Effectiveness as a back injury prevention strategy in nursing personnel.Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota.
37.
WebsterB.S., & SnookS.H. (1994). The cost of compensable upper extremity cumulative trauma disorders.Journal of Occupational Medicine, 36(7), 713–717.
