Background
Method
Design
Development of the STRAIN-EOS assessment tool
STRAIN-EOS questionnaire (second version) | items | response option | content | |
---|---|---|---|---|
demographic information | ||||
general information | in-house developed single items | 4 | multiple | demographic information on the observed person, date of observation, area of work |
framework conditions at work | ||||
observed shift | in-house developed single items | 3 | multiple | hierarchical position, details of the observed shift |
demands at work | ||||
observed quantitative demands | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 6 | 5-point Likert scale | (1) workload is unevenly distributed; the observed person (2) has to work very fast, (3) does not have time to complete all work tasks, (4) gets behind with his/her work, (5) can take it easy and still do his/her worke, (6) does have enough time for his/her work taskse |
observed sensorial demands | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 5 | 5-point Likert scale | work of the observed person demands (1) a great deal of concentration, (2) very clear and precise eyesight, (3) controlling his/her movements, (4) constant attention, (5) a high level of precision |
observed physical risks | in-house developed scale according to EWCS Q30c | 4 | 7-point Likert scale | job of the observed person involves (1) tiring or painful positions, (2) lifting or moving people, (3) carrying or moving heady loads, (4) repetitive arm or hand movements |
work organization and content | ||||
observed possibilities for development | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 7 | 5-point Likert scale | (1) variety of work, (2) work of the observed person demands a high level of skill or expertise, the observed person (3) has to do the same thing over and over againe, (4) work of the observed person requires taking the initiative; the observed person (5) has the possibility to learn new things through his/her work, (6) can use his/her skills or expertise, (7) has the opportunity to develop his/her skills through work |
observed influence at work | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 10 | 5-point Likert scale | (1) other people make decisions concerning his/her worke, (2) the observed person has a large degree of influence concerning his/her work; observed person has influence on (3) how quickly, (4) when, (5) what (6) how to do his/her work, (7) the amount of work, (8) who to work with, (9) his/her work environment, (10) the quality of his/her work |
observed degree of freedom at work | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 4 | 5-point Likert scale | observed person can (1) decide when to take a break, (2) decide when to take his/her holidays, (3) leave work to chat with a colleague, (4) leave work for short private business |
social relations and leadership | ||||
observed predictability | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2017b | 2 | 5-point Likert scale | observed person (1) is well informed in advance, e.g. about important decisions, changes or plans for the future, (2) receives all information needed to do his/her work well |
observed social support | in-house developed scale according to COSPOQ 2017b | 4 | 5-point Likert scale | observed person (1) gets help and support from colleagues or (2) the immediate superior if needed, (3) colleagues or (4) the immediate superior listen to his/her work-related problems |
observed social community | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 3 | 5-point Likert scale | (1) good atmosphere and (2) good cooperation between observed person and colleagues, (3) observed person seems to be part of a community at his/her work |
observed social relations | in-house developed scale according to COPSOQ 2005a | 2 | 5-point Likert scale | observed person (1) has the possibility to talk to his/her colleagues during work, (2) works isolated from his/her colleaguese |
subjective assessment of perceived stress-level during shift | ||||
observer’s estimated level of work-related stress | in-house developed single items based on Leistungserfassung in der Pflege (LEP®)d | 1 | 7-point Likert scale | observer’s estimated level of work-related stress related to his/her observed shift |
questions about non-observable items | ||||
reasons for non-observable items | in-house developed single items | 1 | open | documentation of reasons for non-observable items during the observation |
Calculation of the sample size
Recruitment of health professionals
Recruitment and training of external observers
Interobserver reliability
Data collection
Analyses
Results
Description of the external observation sample
Construct validity
Components | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
quantitative demands | physical risks | sensorial demands | ||
demands at worka | ||||
observed person (o.p.) has to work very fast | .796 | .193 | .271 | |
workload is unevenly distributed | .883 | .273 | −.058 | |
o.p. does not have time to complete all work tasks | .828 | .164 | .047 | |
o.p. gets behind with his/her work | .900 | .193 | .043 | |
o.p. does have enough time for his/her work tasksc | .832 | .183 | .258 | |
work demands very clear and precise eyesight | .036 | .188 | .866 | |
work demands controlling his/her movements | .089 | .523 | .705 | |
work demands a high level of precision | .204 | −.158 | .832 | |
job involves tiring or painful positions | .382 | .778 | .164 | |
job involves lifting or moving people | .230 | .883 | .169 | |
job involves carrying or moving heady loads | .192 | .853 | −.045 | |
work organization and contenta | ||||
possibilities for development | influence at work | |||
work requires taking the initiative | .704 | .366 | ||
o.p. can use his/her skills or expertise | .855 | .046 | ||
work is varied | .688 | .361 | ||
work demands a high level of skill or expertise | .868 | .038 | ||
o.p. has a large degree of influence concerning his/her work | .242 | .720 | ||
o.p. has influence on who to work with | .265 | .534 | ||
o.p. has influence on how to do his/her work | −.006 | .784 | ||
o.p. has influence on what to do at work | .125 | .825 | ||
social relations and leadershipb | ||||
social community | social support | social relations | predictability | |
o.p. is well informed in advance, e.g. about important decisions, changes or plans for the future | .080 | .147 | .194 | .903 |
o.p. receives all information needed in order to do his/her work well | .200 | .373 | .202 | .742 |
o.p. gets help and support from colleagues if needed | .063 | .434 | .702 | .261 |
colleagues listen to his/her work-related problems | .197 | .581 | .571 | .205 |
o.p. gets help and support from the immediate superior if needed | .111 | .847 | .246 | .241 |
the immediate superior listen to his/her work-related problems | .244 | .870 | .147 | .184 |
good atmosphere between o.p. and colleagues | .837 | .113 | .036 | .141 |
good co-operation between o.p. and colleagues | .863 | .238 | −.016 | .107 |
o.p. seems to be part of a community at his/her work | .873 | .070 | .098 | .035 |
o.p. has the possibility to talk to his/her colleagues during work | .287 | .327 | .692 | .232 |
o.p. works isolated from his/her colleaguesc | −.130 | .018 | .906 | .074 |
Reliability and internal consistency
-
quantitative demands: “the observed person can take it easy and still do his/her work”;
-
sensorial demands: “work of the observed person demands a great deal of concentration”, “work of the observed person demands constant attention”;
-
physical risks: “job of the observed person involves repetitive arm or hand movements”;
-
possibilities for development: “the observed person has to do the same thing over and over again”, “the observed person has the possibility to learn new things through his/her work”, “the observed person has the opportunity to develop his/her skills through work”;
-
influence at work: “other people make decisions concerning his/her work”, “the observed person has influence on how quickly to do his/her work”, “the observed person has influence on when to do his/her work”, “the observed person has influence on the amount of work”, “the observed person has influence on his/her work environment”, and “the observed person has influence on the quality of his/her work”.
N | Miss | min-max | Mdn | M (SD) | KMO | items (α) | ICC | |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
demands at work | ||||||||
quantitative demands | 110 | 0 | 0–80 | 25 | 30 (22) | .89 | 5 (.92) | .74–.86 |
sensorial demands | 109 | 1 | 17–100 | 67 | 67 (19) | .66 | 3 (.76) | .54–.70 |
physical risks | 109 | 1 | 0–94 | 17 | 22 (19) | .73 | 3 (.88) | .72–.81 |
work organization and content | ||||||||
possibilities for development | 110 | 0 | 25–100 | 69 | 69 (16) | .82 | 4 (.83) | .52–.78 |
influence at work | 109 | 1 | 13–88 | 50 | 51 (17) | .69 | 4 (.73) | .43–.60 |
social relations and leadership | ||||||||
predictability | 99 | 11 | 13–100 | 63 | 68 (18) | .50 | 2 (.67) | .50 |
social support | 69 | 41 | 0–100 | 75 | 67 (22) | .75 | 4 (.87) | .68–.76 |
social community | 108 | 2 | 42–100 | 83 | 84 (13) | .50 | 3 (.82) | .66–.69 |
social relations | 110 | 0 | 0–100 | 50 | 51 (28) | .72 | 2 (.69) | .53 |
Convergent validity
observation scale | Kendall’s tau-b | |
---|---|---|
correlations coefficient | p-value | |
demands at work | ||
quantitative demands | .598 | .000*** |
sensorial demands | .087 | .252 |
physical risks | .243 | .001** |
work organization and content | ||
possibilities for development | −.016 | .835 |
influence at work | −.103 | .167 |
social relations and leadership | ||
predictability | −.191 | .020* |
social support | −.319 | .001** |
social community | −.171 | .031* |
social relations | −.275 | .000*** |