These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: [Respiratory handicap. Recognition, evaluation and social benefits].
    Author: Marsac J, Pujet JC.
    Journal: Rev Fr Mal Respir; 1983; 11(4):561-77. PubMed ID: 6878855.
    Abstract:
    The medico-social aspects of respiratory handicap pose some perplexing problems, notably in their recognition, rigorous evaluation and in the granting of social security benefits. The clinical and respiratory function data should be standardised and classified according to type and significance of respiratory disease and also according to the degree of co-operation and understanding of the patient. The respiratory handicap should be evaluated after considering the functional disability engendered by the disorder and their socio-professional repercussions. The abnormality in the lungs should be measured by resting tests; the degree of disability by exercise studies; the socio-professional handicap by ergonometric tests to assess the scale of the demands and requirements of family and social and professional life, indeed the cultural and economic style of the individual concerned. Such combined studies would enable recognition of severe chronic respiratory handicap leading to decisions for exemption certificates, such as cases of severe respiratory failure in patients requiring supplementary treatment for oxygen therapy or assisted ventilation. The benefits and grants offered to those with respiratory handicaps would involve a number of rights relating to: care, work, costs of replacement of workers in the event of prolonged sick leave or the benefits of an invalidity pension. There will be other allowances such as invalidity cards, lodging special studies and other rights particularly relating to lodging and special equipment. The present scale is difficult to use both because of its lack of specificity and its ill-chosen terminology. For better balance between the handicap and the benefits offered, a common and more flexible system, with a printed table should be at hand for the doctor to use for certain decisions: long term illness, period of invalidity or early retirement because of medical incapacity. Within each table a sub-section should exist to allow for certain aspects of legislation (accidents at work, occupational illness or rights under common law) at the same time certain adjustments may be necessary which take into account the patient, degree of autonomy life style and social and cultural level. A pilot study of respiratory handicap, to standardise tests, and co-ordinate the planning of the medical and social interactions for a better grasp of the disorder and greater uniformity of the regulations within each disablement benefit system as well as between various other social security regimes would be desirable.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]