RESUMEN
Assessing long/post-COVID syndrome (PCS) following an infection with severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is a multidisciplinary challenge due to the diverse and complex symptoms. Besides discipline-specific evaluation of infection-related organ damage, the main issue is expert objectivity and causality assessment regarding subjective symptoms. The consequences of long/PCS raise questions of insurance rights in all fields of law. In cases of persistent impairment of performance, determining reduction in earning capacity is crucial for those affected. Recognition as an occupational disease (BK no. 3101) is vital for employees in healthcare and welfare sectors, along with occupational accident recognition and assessing the illness's consequences, including the reduction in earning capacity (MdE) in other sectors or work areas. Therefore, expert assessments of illness consequences and differentiation from previous illnesses or damage disposition are necessary in all areas of law, individually based on corresponding organ manifestations in medical fields and interdisciplinarily for complex late sequelae, for instance, by internists with appropriate qualifications for pulmonary or cardiac manifestations and neurologists, psychiatrists, and neuropsychologists for neurological and psychiatric manifestations, etc.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Enfermedades Profesionales , Humanos , COVID-19/epidemiología , SARS-CoV-2 , Accidentes de Trabajo , Síndrome Post Agudo de COVID-19RESUMEN
Against the background of a growing interest in symptom validity assessment in European countries, new data on base rates of negative response bias is presented. A retrospective data analysis of forensic psychological evaluations was performed based on 398 patients with workers' compensation claims. 48 percent of all patients scored below cut-off in at least one symptom validity test (SVT) indicating possible negative response bias. However, different SVTs appear to have differing potential to identify negative response bias. The data point at the necessity to use modern methods to check data validity in civil forensic contexts.
Asunto(s)
Lesión Encefálica Crónica/diagnóstico , Evaluación de la Discapacidad , Testimonio de Experto/legislación & jurisprudencia , Simulación de Enfermedad/diagnóstico , Trastornos Mentales/diagnóstico , Dolor/diagnóstico , Indemnización para Trabajadores/legislación & jurisprudencia , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Sesgo , Lesión Encefálica Crónica/psicología , Femenino , Alemania , Humanos , Masculino , Simulación de Enfermedad/psicología , Trastornos Mentales/psicología , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pruebas Neuropsicológicas/estadística & datos numéricos , Dolor/psicología , Inventario de Personalidad/estadística & datos numéricos , Psicometría/estadística & datos numéricos , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Estudios Retrospectivos , Adulto JovenRESUMEN
WIP, Hopper-VOT, Benton-Test d2-Test, and the KVT were used to examine 124 brain-damaged people with sufficiently secured localized wounds on the brain (48 frontal, 30 temperoral, 29 parietal and 17 occipital lobe damaged patients). The results showed considerable differences depending on the localisation of the injury. The differences between the frontal lobe damaged and the parieto-occipital damaged patients were significant. A normal score in one or more tests does not exclude a frontal lobe damage.