The need for scales describing long-term consequences of injuries is growing. The introduction of the Injury Impairment Scale (IIS) is therefore an important step towards a more extended description of injuries, and an important complement to the AIS. This paper present studies of the validity and reliability of the IIS for injuries that occurred in Sweden in the late eighties and early nineties. The criteria for the IIS were compared to the settlement of an insurance company, on a single diganosis level. It was found that the ISS scores did not reflect the outcomes from the injuries that had occurred. This was true both for the level of impairment as well as the range of outcomes in real life. It is concluded that ISS of outcomes in real life. It is concluded that ISS at this stage can not predict the number of impairments, as well as the probable levels of impairment. It is proposed that the impairment ratings should be based on both the probability as well as the level of impairment. (A)
Abstract