Search

Personal injury is a legal term for a physical or psychic injury suffered by the plaintiff under civil and/or tort law. With reference to non-pecuniary damages, the evidence itself of physical and/or psychic injury is not sufficient for damage compensation. The process of ascertaining impairments and/or disabilities which pertain to the "personal sphere" of the individual, such as pain and suffering, loss of amenity, and/or psycho-existential damage, poses particular difficulties in relation to the obtainment of scientific evidence. The "immateriality" and the subjective connotation of the personal sphere are, in themselves, critical issues. The clinical data obtained from the neuropsychological ascertainment find their essential prerequisite in the active participation of the examinee who, in legally relevant contexts (criminal law, civil law, insurance), may be "affected" by personal interests. The present manuscript presents a novel interdisciplinary methodology, experimented on a series of judicial and extra-judicial cases, aimed at the attainment of objectivity and accuracy eligible in relation to the judicial settlement of cases and other matters involving the ascertainment of peculiar aspects of non-pecuniary damage.

Compensation for personal damage, defined as any pecuniary or non-pecuniary loss causally related to a personal injury under civil-tort law, is strictly based on the local jurisdiction and therefore varies significantly across the world. This manuscript presents the first "International Guidelines on Medico-Legal Methods of Ascertainment and Criteria of Evaluation of Personal Injury and Damage under Civil-Tort Law". This consensus document, which includes a step-by-step illustrated explanation of flow charts articulated in eight sequential steps and a comprehensive description of the ascertainment methodology and the criteria of evaluation, has been developed by an International Working Group composed of juridical and medico-legal experts and adopted as Guidelines by the International Academy of Legal Medicine (IALM).

Unlabelled: Significant differences in surface electromyography (SEMG) have been reported between persons with low back pain (LBP) and normal, healthy controls. This manuscript presents a systematic meta-analytic review of studies examining SEMG differences between these groups. Forty-four articles were identified using MEDLINE and a review of reference lists in articles. For static SEMG, the largest effect size was observed for SEMG while standing, with subjects having LBP demonstrating higher SEMG. The effect size for flexion/relaxation measures was found to be very high (d = -1.71). Studies examining SEMG during isometric exercise or muscle recovery following exercise produced inconsistent findings. Sensitivity and specificity of SEMG for dynamic SEMG measures averaged 88.8% and 81.3%. Most classification schemes were statistically determined and utilized a combination of measures. Only one published study prospectively validated a classification scheme. SEMG measures of flexion-relaxation appear to distinguish LBP subjects from controls with good accuracy, and the sensitivity and specificity of SEMG can be increased by using multiple measures. Further research is needed to determine the combination of measures that are cost-effective, reliable, valid and discriminate with a high degree of accuracy between healthy persons and those with LBP., Perspective: SEMG is a simple and noninvasive measure of muscle activity. SEMG measures hold promise as an objective marker of LBP.