• Johanne Tüscher, Cyrille Burrus, Philippe Vuistiner, Bertrand Léger, Gilles Rivier, and François Luthi.
• Faculty of Biology and Medicine, University of Lausanne, Rue du Bugnon 21, 1011, Lausanne, Switzerland.
• J Occup Rehabil. 2018 Sep 1; 28 (3): 513-522.

AbstractPurpose Measuring the predictive value of the Fear-Avoidance Model (FAM) on lifting tasks in Functional Capacity Evaluation (FCE), and on reasons for stopping the evaluation (safe maximal effort, versus self-limited). Methods A monocentric prospective study was conducted on 298 consecutive inpatients. Components of the FAM were analyzed using the Cumulative Psychosocial Factor Index (CPFI: kinesiophobia, catastrophizing, depressive mood) and perceived disability (Hand/Spinal Function Sort: HFS/SFS). Floor-to-waist, waist-to-overhead and dominant-hand lifting tests were measured according to the FCE guidelines. Maximal safe performance was judged by certified FCE assessors. Analyses were conducted with linear multiple regression models. Results The CPFI was significantly associated with the 3 FCE lifting tests: floor-to-waist (ß = - 1.12; p = 0.039), waist-to-overhead (ß = - 0.88; p = 0.011), and dominant-handed lifting (ß = - 1.21; p = 0.027). Higher perceived disability was also related to lower performances: floor-to-waist (ß = 0.09; p < 0.001), waist-to-overhead (ß = 0.04; p < 0.001), and dominant-handed lifting (ß = 0.06; p < 0.001). The CPFI was not related to performances of patients with self-limited effort despite higher psychological scores, while a relationship was found for patients who achieved a safe maximal performance. Higher perceived disability was related to performances in both situations. Conclusions FAM components should be taken into account when interpreting maximal physical performance in FCE. This study also suggests that factors other than pain-related fears may influence patients with self-limited effort.

25 keywords...

hide…