- B.C. auto insurance rates are going up due to higher bodily injury claims and fraud.
- Allstate insurance files patent for “Traffic-based Driving Analysis”tool to spy on car owners/drivers.
- Should police have the capability to take control of driverless cars?
- Intact working with Uber on new products for ridesharing but will the regulator approve them?
- Competition from Uber motivates Beck Taxi to start a petition to lower taxi fares in Toronto.
- Toronto’s most expensive car insurance is found in areas of Downsview in North York.
Wednesday, 23 September 2015
Insurance News - Wednesday, September 23, 2015
Here are the leading auto insurance headlines from ONTARIO AUTO INSURANCE TOPICS ON TWITTER for Wednesday, September 23, 2015:
Friday, 18 September 2015
FSCO Prepared to Introduce New Minor Injury Protocols
Why is FSCO releasing
new treatment protocols?
In
the Superintendent’s report on the Five Year Review released in 2009, a
recommendation was made to develop a treatment protocol for minor injuries that
reflects current scientific and medical literature. This recommendation was accepted by the
government and confirmed in the 2012 Ontario Budget, which acknowledged that
newer scientific and evidence-based approaches can be applied to the treatment
of minor injuries resulting from automobile accidents.
How were the new
treatment protocols developed?
In
2012, Dr. Pierre Côté, Associate Professor, Faculty of Health Sciences,
University of Ontario Institute of Technology, was awarded a consulting
contract to develop the Minor Injury Treatment Protocol (MITP) after an open
competitive Request For Proposal process.
The Ontario Protocolfor Traffic Injury Management Collaboration includes a multidisciplinary team of
expert clinicians (from medical, dental, physiotherapy, chiropractic, psychological,
occupational therapy and nursing disciplines), academics and scientists
(epidemiologists, clinical epidemiologists and health economists), a patient
liaison, a consumer advocate, a retired judge and automobile insurance industry
experts. I played a small role on the
project team.
Over
the 2-year course of the project, the project team drew upon three sources of
information concerning traffic injury rehabilitation.
1.
The
team critically reviewed the contents and evidentiary basis of published
clinical practice guidelines for the management of traffic injuries.
2.
They
carried out an exhaustive search followed by a rigorous methodological
evaluation of the current scientific literature concerning the management of
traffic injuries published in peer-reviewed journals in the English language. They
screened 234,995 abstracts and conducted in depth reviews of 597 scientific
papers. This effort was summarized in 43 new systematic reviews of the
literature.
3.
They
also conducted a new study in which they gathered and carefully considered the
narratives of Ontarians who have sustained injuries in traffic collisions and
received health care.
The
Final Report of the Minor Injury Treatment Protocol Project, titled
"Enabling Recovery from Common Traffic Injuries: A Focus on the InjuredPerson" (Final Report) was delivered to FSCO at the end of December 2014
What does the Final
Report recommend?
The
Final Report recommends a new classification of traffic injuries. The natural
history of the initial injury is the basis for classification. A Type I injury
is likely to recover within days to a few months of the collision; but during
the period of recovery the patient may benefit from education, advice,
reassurance and time-limited evidence-based clinical care. Type I injuries are
the focus of this report. A Type II injury is not likely to undergo spontaneous
recovery, and the injured person may require medical, surgical and/or
psychiatric/psychological care. Type III injuries are a subset of Type II
injuries, that involve permanent catastrophic impairment or disability. The
care for Type II and Type III injuries is not covered in this report.
Persons
with Type I injuries should be educated and reassured from the outset that
their own inherent healing capacities are likely to lead to a substantial
recovery. They should also be informed that only a discrete set of treatments
show evidence of any benefit; and that the same evidence shows that benefit is
largely on the basis of pain alleviation. Healthcare professionals need to
listen to the patient’s concerns and emphasize measures to assist them to cope,
recognize and avoid complications.
The
MITP includes clinical prediction rules to screen for patients who may be at
higher risk for developing chronic pain and disability. In addition, it focuses
on treatment outcomes, and provides health care providers with numerous
milestones to measure progress.
Interventions
for Type I injuries should only be provided in accordance with published
evidence for effectiveness, including parameters of dosage, duration, and
frequency; and within the most appropriate phase. The emphasis during the early
phase (0-3 months) should be on education, advice, reassurance, activity and
encouragement. Health care professionals should be reassured and encouraged to
consider watchful waiting and clinical monitoring as evidence-based therapeutic
options during the acute phase. For injured persons requiring therapy,
time-limited and evidence-based intervention(s) should be implemented on a
shared decision-making basis, an approach that equally applies to patients in
the persistent phase (4-6 months).
Sixteen
care pathways have been developed to cover the clinical management of:
·
Neck
pain and associated disorders
·
Soft
tissue disorders of the upper extremities
·
Temporomandibular
disorders
·
Mild
traumatic brain injuries
·
Low
back pain
What’s next?
FSCO had been conducting
a consultation process with stakeholders.
Before any final guidelines can be implemented, the government will need
to make changes to the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
The
complexity of the proposed changes will require a substantial educational
initiative. Clinicians and insurance
company claims staff will need to be educated and trained on the recommended
care pathways. In some cases there may
be resistance. In addition, it is
advisable that a public education campaign be undertaken to educate the general
public on the proper management of soft tissue injuries. It is not clear who would fund such a
significant education campaign.
Monday, 7 September 2015
New Catastrophic Impairment Definition To Be Introduced June 2016
The Ontario government has finally amended the SABS definition of catastrophic impairment.
The government's 2010 auto insurance reforms included recommendations most seriously injured accident victims. The government directed FSCO to consult with the medical community to amend the definition of catastrophic impairment as set out in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
In 2010 FSCO announced the appointment of Dr. Pierre Côté as Chair of the Catastrophic Impairment Expert Panel. The Panel submitted it's recommendations to the FSCO Superintendent in the spring of 2011. In December 2011, the Superintendent submitted his report to the government.
The new definition is effective for accidents on and after June 1, 2016. The revised definition also provides for an automatic designation of catastrophic impairment for children with traumatic brain injuries in specified circumstances.
Below is a chart that compares the current SABS definition, the Superintendent's recommended definition and the new SABS definition that will be introduced next year.
The government's 2010 auto insurance reforms included recommendations most seriously injured accident victims. The government directed FSCO to consult with the medical community to amend the definition of catastrophic impairment as set out in the Statutory Accident Benefits Schedule.
In 2010 FSCO announced the appointment of Dr. Pierre Côté as Chair of the Catastrophic Impairment Expert Panel. The Panel submitted it's recommendations to the FSCO Superintendent in the spring of 2011. In December 2011, the Superintendent submitted his report to the government.
The new definition is effective for accidents on and after June 1, 2016. The revised definition also provides for an automatic designation of catastrophic impairment for children with traumatic brain injuries in specified circumstances.
Below is a chart that compares the current SABS definition, the Superintendent's recommended definition and the new SABS definition that will be introduced next year.
Current
SABS
|
Superintendent’s
2011 Report
|
2016
SABS
|
Paraplegia or quadriplegia;
|
paraplegia or tetraplegia that meets
the following criteria i and either ii
or iii:
ii. The neurological recovery is such
that the permanent ASIA Grade can be determined with reasonable medical
certainty according to the ASIA and
iii. The permanent ASIA Grade is A, B,
or C or,
iv. The permanent ASIA Grade is or will
be D provided that the insured has a permanent inability to walk
independently as defined by scores 0–5 on the Spinal Cord Independence
Measure item 12 and/or requires urological surgical diversion, an implanted
device, or intermittent or constant catheterization in order to manage the
residual neuro-urological impairment.
|
Paraplegia or tetraplegia that meets
the following criteria:
i. The insured person’s neurological
recovery is such that the person’s permanent grade on the ASIA Impairment
Scale can be determined.
ii. The insured person’s permanent
grade on the ASIA Impairment Scale is or will be,
A. A, B or C, or
B. D, and
1. the insured person’s score on the
Spinal Cord Independence Measure, Version III, item 12 and applied over a
distance of up to 10 metres on an even indoor surface is 0 to 5,
2. the insured person requires
urological surgical diversion, an implanted device, or intermittent or constant
catheterization in order to manage a residual neuro-urological impairment, or
3. the insured person has impaired
voluntary control over anorectal function that requires a bowel routine, a
surgical diversion or an implanted device.
|
The amputation of an arm or leg or
another impairment causing the total and permanent loss of use of an arm or a
leg;
|
Severe impairment of ambulatory
mobility, as determined in accordance with the following criteria:
i. Trans-tibial or higher amputation of
one limb, or
ii. Severe and permanent alteration of
prior structure and function involving one or both lower limbs as a result of
which it can be reasonably determined that the Insured Person has or will
have a permanent inability to walk independently and instead requires at
least bilateral ambulatory assistive devices [mobility impairment equivalent
to that defined by scores 0–5 on the Spinal Cord Independence Measure item 12,
ability to walk <10 m).
|
Severe impairment of ambulatory
mobility or use of an arm, or amputation that meets the following criteria:
i. Trans-tibial or higher amputation of
a leg.
ii. Amputation of an arm or another
impairment causing the total and permanent loss of use of an arm.
iii. Severe and permanent alteration of
prior structure and function involving one or both legs as a result of which
the insured person’s score on the Spinal Cord Independence Measure, Version
III, item 12, and applied over a distance of up to 10 metres on an even
indoor surface is 0 to 5.
|
Total loss of vision in both eyes
|
Legal blindness in both eyes due to
structural damage to the visual system. Non-organic visual loss (hysterical
blindness) is excluded from this definition.
|
Loss of vision of both eyes that meets
the following criteria:
i. Even with the use of corrective
lenses or medication,
A. visual acuity in both eyes is 20/200
(6/60) or less as measured by the Snellen Chart or an equivalent chart, or
B. the greatest diameter of the field
of vision in both eyes is 20 degrees or less.
ii. The loss of vision is not
attributable to non-organic causes.
|
Brain impairment that results in,
(i) a score of 9 or less on the Glasgow
Coma Scale, according to a test administered within a reasonable period of
time after the accident by a person trained for that purpose, or
(ii) a score of 2 (vegetative) or 3
(severe disability) on the Glasgow Outcome Scale, according to a test
administered more than six months after the accident by a person trained for
that purpose;
|
Traumatic Brain Injury in Adults (18
years of age or older):
ii. Catastrophic impairment, based upon
an evaluation that has been in accordance with published guidelines for a
structured GOS-E assessment to be:
a) Vegetative (VS) after 1 months or
b) Severe Disability Upper (SD+) or
Severe Disability Lower (SD -) after 6 months, or Moderate Disability Lower
(MD-) after one year due to documented brain impairment, provided that the
determination has been preceded by a period of in-patient neurological
rehabilitation in a recognized rehabilitation center.
|
If the insured person was 18 years of
age or older at the time of the accident, a traumatic brain injury that meets
the following criteria:
i. The injury shows positive findings
on a computerized axial tomography scan, a magnetic resonance imaging or any
other medically recognized brain diagnostic technology indicating
intracranial pathology that is a result of the accident, including, but not
limited to, intracranial contusions or haemorrhages, diffuse axonal injury,
cerebral edema, midline shift or pneumocephaly.
ii. When assessed in accordance with the
Glasgow Outcome Scale and the Extended Glasgow Outcome Scale, the injury
results in a rating of,
A. Vegetative State (VS or VS*), one
month or more after the accident,
B. Upper Severe Disability (Upper SD or
Upper SD*) or Lower Severe Disability (Lower SD or Lower SD*), six months or
more after the accident, or
C. Lower Moderate Disability (Lower MD
or Lower MD*), one year or more after the accident.
|
An impairment or combination of
impairments that, in accordance with the American Medical Association's
Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition, 1993, results
in 55 per cent or more impairment of the whole person;
|
A physical impairment or combination of
physical impairments that, in accordance with the American Medical
Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition
1993, (GEPI-4), results in a physical impairment rating of 55 per cent whole
person impairment (WPI).
i. Unless covered by specific rating
guidelines within relevant Sections of Chapters 3-13 of GEPI-4, all
impairments relatable to non-psychiatric symptoms and syndromes (e.g.
functional somatic syndromes, chronic pain syndromes, chronic fatigue
syndromes, fibromyalgia Syndrome, etc.) that arise from the accident are to
be understood to have been incorporated into the weighting of the GEPI-4
physical impairment ratings set out in Chapters 3 – 13.
ii. With the exception of traumatic
brain injury impairments, mental and/or behavioural impairments are excluded
from the rating of physical impairments.
iii. Definition 2(e), including
subsections I and II, cannot be used for a determination of catastrophic
impairment until two years after the accident, unless at least three months
after the accident, there is a traumatic physical impairment rating of at
least 55% WPI and there is no reasonable expectation of improvement to less
than 55% WPI.
|
A physical impairment or combination of
physical impairments that, in accordance with the American Medical
Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition,
1993, results in 55 per cent or more physical impairment of the whole person.
|
An impairment that, in accordance with
the American Medical Association's Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent
Impairment, 4th edition, 1993, results in a class 4 impairment (marked impairment)
or class 5 impairment (extreme impairment) due to mental or behavioural
disorde
|
The post-traumatic psychiatric
impairment(s) must arise as a direct result of one or more of the following
disorders, when diagnosed in accordance with DSM IV TR criteria: (a) Major
Depressive Disorder, (b) Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, (c) a Psychotic Disorder,
or (d) such other disorder(s) as may be published within a Government
Guideline.
ii. Impairments due to pain are
excluded other than with respect to the extent to which they prolong or
contribute to the duration or severity of the psychiatric disorders which may
be considered under Criterion (i).
iii. Any impairment or impairments arising
from traumatic brain injury must be evaluated using Section 2(d) or 2(e)
rather than this Section.
iv. Severe impairment(s) are consistent
with a Global Assessment of Function (GAF) score of 40 or less, after
exclusion of all physical and environmental limitations.
v. For the purposes of determining
whether the impairment is sufficiently severe as to be consistent to
Criterion (iv) - a GAF score of 40 or less - at minimum there must be
demonstrable and persuasive evidence that the impairment(s) very seriously
compromise independence and psychosocial functioning, such that the Insured
Person clearly requires substantial mental health care and support services.
In determining the demonstrability and persuasiveness of the evidence, the
following generally recognized indicia are relevant:
a) Institutionalization;
Repeated hospitalizations, where the
goal and duration are directly related to the provision of treatment of
severe psychiatric impairment;
c) Appropriate interventions and/or
psychopharmacological medications such as: ECT, mood stabilizer medication,
neuroleptic medications and/or such other medications that are primarily
indicated for the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders;
d) Determination of loss of competence
to manage finances and property, or Treatment Decisions, or for the care of
dependents;
e) Monitoring through scheduled
in-person psychiatric follow-up reviews at a frequency equivalent to at least
once per month.
f) Regular and frequent supervision and
direction by community-based mental health services, using community funded
mental health professionals to ensure proper hygiene, nutrition, compliance
with prescribed medication and/or other forms of psychiatric therapeutic
interventions, and safety for self or others.
|
An impairment that, in accordance with
the American Medical Association’s Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent
Impairment, 4th edition, 1993 results in a class 4 impairment (marked
impairment) in three or more areas of function that precludes useful
functioning or a class 5 impairment (extreme impairment) in one or more areas
of function that precludes useful functioning, due to mental or behavioural
disorder.
A mental or behavioural impairment,
excluding traumatic brain injury, determined in accordance with the rating
methodology in Chapter 14, Section 14.6 of the American Medical Association’s
Guides to the Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 6th edition, 2008, that,
when the impairment score is combined with a physical impairment described in
paragraph 6 in accordance with the combining requirements set out in the
Combined Values Table of the American Medical Association’s Guides to the
Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition, 1993, results in 55 percent
or more impairment of the whole person.
|
if an insured person is under the age
of 16 years at the time of the accident and none of the Glasgow Coma Scale,
the Glasgow Outcome Scale or the American Medical Association's Guides to the
Evaluation of Permanent Impairment, 4th edition, 1993, referred to in clause
(2) (d), (e) or (f) can be applied by reason of the age of the insured
person.
|
Paediatric Traumatic Brain Injury
(prior to age 18)
i. A child who sustains a traumatic
brain injury is automatically deemed to have sustained a catastrophic
impairment provided that either one of the following criteria (a or b) is met
on the basis of traumatic brain injury sustained in the accident in question:
a) In-patient admission to a Level I
trauma centre with positive findings on CT/MRI scan indicating intracranial
pathology that is the result of the accident, including but not limited to
intracranial contusions or haemorrhages, diffuse axonal injury, cerebral
edema, midline shift, or pneumocephaly; or
b) In-patient admission to a publically
funded rehabilitation;
Paediatric catastrophic impairment on
the basis of traumatic brain injury is any one of the following criteria:
ii. At any time after the first 1
months, the child’s level of neurological function does not exceed the KOSCHI
Category of Vegetative.
iii. At any time after the first 6
months, the child’s level of function does not exceed the KOSCHI Category of
Severe. (2) May be fully conscious and able to communicate but not yet able
to carry out any self care activities such as feeding. (3) Severe Impairment
implies a continuing high level of dependency, but the child can assist in
daily activities; for example, can feed self or walk with assistance or help
to place items of clothing.
iv. At any time after the first 9
months, the child’s level of function remains seriously altered such that the
child is for the most part not age appropriately independent and requires
supervision/actual help for physical, cognitive and/or behavioural
impairments for the majority of his/her waking day.
|
If the insured person was under 18
years of age at the time of the accident, a traumatic brain injury that meets
one of the following criteria:
i. The insured person is accepted for
admission, on an in-patient basis, to a public hospital named in a Guideline
with positive findings on a computerized axial tomography scan, a magnetic
resonance imaging or any other medically recognized brain diagnostic
technology indicating intracranial pathology that is a result of the
accident, including, but not limited to, intracranial contusions or
haemorrhages, diffuse axonal injury, cerebral edema, midline shift or
pneumocephaly.
ii. The insured person is accepted for
admission, on an in-patient basis, to a program of neurological
rehabilitation in a paediatric rehabilitation facility that is a member of
the Ontario Association of Children’s Rehabilitation Services.
iii. One month or more after the
accident, the insured person’s level of neurological function does not exceed
category 2 (Vegetative) on the King’s Outcome Scale for Childhood Head Injury.
iv. Six months or more after the
accident, the insured person’s level of neurological function does not exceed
category 3 (Severe disability) on the King’s Outcome Scale for Childhood Head
Injury.
v. Nine months or more after the
accident, the insured person’s level of function remains seriously impaired
such that the insured person is not age-appropriately independent and
requires in-person supervision or assistance for physical, cognitive or
behavioural impairments for the majority of the insured person’s waking day.
|
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)