Os autores informam que não há conflito de interesse.
FERREIRA, Luciano Resende,
NASCIMENTO, Isabella Cotta do,
FERREIRA, Laura Cristina Rios,
FERREIRA, Lívia Helena Junqueira,
FREGONESI, Raísa Laisner,
SILVA, Glaucia Senna Martins da.
Introduction: A The assessment of people with disabilities can be made by using various instruments including for example the ICF (International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health). This instrument has been used by the Brazilian National Social Security Institute (INSS) since 2011 to concede the Social Continuous Benefit (BPC) for the disabled person, and it evaluates incapacity for work and independent life. The ICF evaluate the environmental factors, participation and activities and body functioning and iti is performed by the medical examiner and by the social assistant. Since ICF has been used in Brazil, little is known regarding the results of its application. For this reason, it is important to perform a retrospective analysis of ICF results.
Objective: This study aimed to assess the profile of BPC applicants and the results of the ICF used by the social security medical examiners and social workers on the evaluation of person with disabilities.
Methods: This was a retrospective study involving the evaluation of 54 BPC applicants of the INSS in Brazil. Applicants were evaluated from March to June 2016 and collected these data: sex, age, average schooling, and average scores from 0 to 4 (0- no disability, 1- mild, 2- moderate, 3- severe, 4- complete disability) for the following ICF domains: environmental factors and activities/participation made by the social worker, body functions and activities/participation made by the medical examiners, whether fulfills or not the requirements for granting the benefit, International classification of diseases (ICD – 10) and the final results of the evaluations.
Results: The result of the profile analysis of applicants who requested BPC showed that most were male adults (58%) with incomplete primary education (56%) presenting psychiatric disorders (48%) followed by orthopaedic and trauma/sequelae diseases (17%) and cardiovascular diseases (17%). The results revealed divergent values between the ones obtained from the medical evaluation with lower values (mean scores of 0,41) in the activity/participation domain compared with results of higher values obtained from the evaluation by the social assistants (mean scores of 3,18) for the same activity/participation domain, and a low percentage of cases that met the requirements for granting the benefit (11% had favorable results).
Conclusions: It can be concluded from these data that the results were very divergent when comparing the evaluations made by the medical examiners and social workers. These results may help assist in a better understanding of the analysis of the ICF use as an instrument for the evaluation of the BPC and it is suggested the need of possibly better standardization in the method of the ICF instrument application in order to minimize the divergence of results.
REFERENCES
1-INSS. Manual Prático da Capacitação do Instrumento IFBr para Pessoa com Deficiência – Lei Complementar 142/2013 – INSS. Perícia Médica e Serviço Social, 2013.
2-Ribeiro, M., Myazaki, M.H., Jucá, S.S.H, Sakamoto, H., Pinto, P.P.N., Battistella, L.R. Validação da Versão Brasileira da Medida de Independência Funcional. Acta Fisiatr., 2004;11(2):72-76.
3-Santos, W.R. Pessoas com Deficiência: nossa maior minoria. Physis Revista de Saúde Coletiva, 2008; 18(3): 501-519.
