019: What's compensable got to do with it?
Professionals in the personal injury industry often grapple with non-compensable conditions and psychosocial factors and system limitations often leaves us with only two options.
Howdy folks,
In the personal injury industry, we love to champion a psychosocial approach to injury management. But here’s the reality check: our compensable schemes are often woefully unprepared to truly tackle these psychosocial issues. We can talk the talk about psychosocial factors all day long, but our systems barely scratch the surface when it comes to identifying and addressing them effectively. It’s time we face this reality head-on and start having honest conversations about these limitations. And more importantly, let’s elevate the voices within our community who actually have practical solutions.
Let’s be real – we like to believe we’re experts in managing psychosocial factors, but the data tells a different story. When we step back and reassess, we see that there are many pathways to addressing psychosocial barriers and achieving holistic care, not just within the confines of our current schemes.
Professionals in the personal injury industry often grapple with non-compensable conditions and psychosocial factors that impact outcomes. With the system's limited capacity to provide solutions, we usually face one of two scenarios:
1. we ignore these factors and let them drift off into the ether, or
2. we acknowledge them and seek solutions, often beyond the scope of compensable schemes.
Consider the case where a compensable lower back injury morphs into a hip and then a knee issue. Sure, there’s a literal connection between these areas, but there's also a figurative link: an issue with the lower back might lead to altered movement patterns that affect the hips and knees. The real question becomes: where does itend? And more importantly, who’s footing the bill?
The real challenge isn’t in diagnosing conditions and injury – we’ve got that down (Yay, science!). The challenge is figuring out who’s going to fund the interventions. Even with a recognised compensable injury, we debate what constitutes reasonable or necessary treatment. If we’re quibbling over that, imagine the scrutiny for non-compensable injuries or psychosocial interventions.
So, let’s cut to the chase: it’s not about whether the intervention is needed, but whether it’s worth the investment. For instance, if a compensable injury prevents someone from socialising and connecting with their community, leading to depression and low mood, can we justify funding psychological interventions?
But I’m getting ahead of myself. The crux of this post is to highlight the urgent need to address psychosocial factors effectively. Managing biopsychosocial (BPS) factors is a three-step process, and it requires problem-solving and creativity:
1. Listen and Learn
2. Identify Interventions
3. Find access options for interventions
At its core, injury management is a reactive process. Proactive prevention has failed, so we’re left reacting to incidents and injuries. Along the way, we aimed to be proactive, but what if we just continued to be reactive by applying skills and knowledge to the specific and individual needs of workers.
I’d much enjoy hearing your thoughts. My opinions are strong, and lightly held.
Cheers for now, -Rhea ✌🏽
Are you a personal injury professional? Check out the PIPROC by The Intelligent Rebellion. We organise casual meet ups with other PI Professionals around Australia.
