nach oben

Erschienen in:

01.12.2014

Reliability and Validity of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire (Spanish Version)

verfasst von: Jose M. Ramada, Consol Serra, Benjamin C. Amick III, Femke I. Abma, Juan R. Castaño, Gemma Pidemunt, Ute Bültmann, George L. Delclos

Erschienen in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation | Ausgabe 4/2014

Einloggen, um Zugang zu erhalten

Abstract

Purpose Recently, the cross-cultural adaptation of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire to Spanish was carried out, achieving satisfactory psychometric properties. Now we examined the reliability and validity of the adapted [Work role functioning questionnaire-Spanish version (WRFQ-SpV)] in a general working population with and without (physical and mental) health issues to evaluate its measurement properties. Methods A cross-sectional study was conducted among active workers. For reliability, we calculated Cronbach alphas to assess ‘internal consistency’, and the standard error of measurement (SEM) to evaluate ‘measurement error’. We assessed the ‘structural validity’ through confirmatory factor analyses and ‘construct validity’ by means of hypotheses testing. The consensus-based standard for the selection of health status measurement instruments (COSMIN) taxonomy were used in the design of the study. Results A total of 455 workers completed the questionnaire. It showed excellent internal consistency (α = 0.98). The SEM for the overall scale was 7.10. The original five factor structure reflected fair dimensionality of the construct (Chi square, 1,445.8; 314 degrees of freedom; root mean square error of approximation = 0.08; comparative fit index >0.95 and weighed root mean residual >0.90). For construct validity, all hypotheses were confirmed differentiating groups with different jobs, health conditions and ages. Moderate to strong correlations were found between WRFQ-SpV and a related construct (work ability). Conclusions Our study provides evidence of the reliability and validity of the WRFQ-SpV to measure health-related work functioning in day-to-day practice and research in occupational health care and the rehabilitation of disabled workers. It should be useful to monitor improvements in work functioning after implementing rehabilitation and/or accommodation programs. Longitudinal studies are needed to assess the responsiveness of the questionnaire.

Nur mit Berechtigung zugänglich

Ross D. Ageing and work: an overview. Occup Med (Lond). 2010;60:169–71.CrossRef

Hairault JO, Langot F, Sopraseuth T. Distance to retirement and older workers employment: the case for delaying the retirement age. J Eur Econ Assoc. 2010;8:1034–76.CrossRef

Macdonald EB, Sanati KA. Occupational health services now and in the future: the need for a paradigm shift. J Occup Environ Med. 2010;52:1273–7.PubMedCrossRef

Sampere M, Gimeno D, Serra C, Plana M, Martínez JM, Delclos GL, Benavides FG. Organizational return to work support and sick leave duration: a cohort of Spanish workers with a long-term non-work-related sick leave episode. J Occup Environ Med. 2011;53:674–9.PubMedCrossRef

Wadell G, Burton T, Aylward M. Work and common health problems. J Insur Med. 2007;39:109–20.

Butterworth P, Leach LS, Strazdins L, Olesen SC, Rodgers B, Broom DH. The psychosocial quality of work determines whether employment has benefits for mental health: results from a longitudinal national household panel survey. Occup Environ Med. 2011;68:806–12.PubMedCrossRef

Abma FI, van der Klink JJ, Bültmann U. The work role functioning questionnaire 2.0 (Dutch version): examination of its reliability, validity and responsiveness in the general working population. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23:135–47.PubMedCrossRef

Jette AM. The functional status index: reliability and validity of a self-report functional disability measure. J Rheumatol Suppl. 1987;14(Suppl 15):15–21.PubMed

Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics. 1993;4:353–65.PubMedCrossRef

10.

Van Roijen L, Essink-Bot ML, Koopmanschap MA, Bonsel G, Rutten FF. Labor and health status in economic evaluation of health care: the health and labor questionnaire. Int J Technol Assess Health Care. 1996;12:405–15.PubMedCrossRef

11.

Endicott J, Nee J. Endicott work productivity scale (EWPS): a new measure to assess treatment effects. Psichopharmacol Bull. 1997;33:13–6.

12.

Tuomi K, Ilmarien J, Jahkola A, Katajarinne L, Tulkki A. Work Ability Index. In: Rautoja S, Pietiläinen R, editors. Finland: K-Print Oy Vantaa, Finnish Institute of Occupational Health; 1998.

13.

Welbourne TM, Johnson DE, Erez A. Role-based performance scale: validity analysis of a theory-based measure. Acad Manag J. 1998;41:5540–55.CrossRef

14.

Koopman C, Pelletier KR, Murray JF, Sharda CE, Berger ML, Turpin RS, et al. Stanford presenteeism scale: health status and employee productivity. J Occup Environ Med. 2002;44:14–20.PubMedCrossRef

15.

Gilworth G, Chamberlain MA, Harvey A, Woodhouse A, Smith J, Smyth MG, Tennant A. Development of a work instability scale for rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum. 2003;49:349–54.PubMedCrossRef

16.

Gignac MA, Badley EM, Lacaille D, Cott CC, Adam P, Anis AH. Managing arthritis and employment: making arthritis-related work changes as a means of adaptation. Arthritis Rheum. 2004;51:909–16.PubMedCrossRef

17.

Schultz AB, Edington DW. Employee health and presenteeism: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17:547–79.PubMedCrossRef

18.

Lerner D, Amick BC 3rd, Rogers WH, Malspeis S, Bungay K, Cynn D. The work limitations questionnaire. Med Care. 2001;39:72–85.PubMedCrossRef

19.

Amick BC III, Lerner D, Rogers WH, Rooney T, Katz JN. A review of health-related work outcome measures and their uses and recommended measures. Spine. 2000;25:3152–60.PubMedCrossRef

20.

Durand MJ, Vachon B, Hong QN, Imbeau D, Amick BC III, Loisel P. The cross-cultural adaptation of the work role functioning questionnaire in Canadian French. Int J Rehabil Res. 2004;27:261–8.PubMedCrossRef

21.

Gallasch CH, Alexandre NM, Amick B 3rd. Cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and validity of the work role functioning questionnaire to Brazilian Portuguese. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17:701–11.PubMedCrossRef

22.

Abma FI, Amick BC III, Brouwer S, van der Klink JJ, Bültmann U. The cross-cultural adaptation of the work role functioning questionnaire to Dutch. Work. 2012;43:203–10.PubMed

23.

Ramada JM, Serra C, Amick BC III, Castaño JR, Delclos GL. Cross-cultural adaptation of the work role functioning questionnaire to Spanish spoken in Spain. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23:566–75.PubMedCrossRef

24.

Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RW, Bouter LM, de Vet HC. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Life Res. 2011;21:651–7.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

25.

Williams RM, Schmuck G, Allwood S, et al. Psychometric evaluation of health-related work outcome measures for musculoskeletal disorders: a systematic review. J Occup Rehabil. 2007;17:504–21.PubMedCrossRef

26.

Abma FI, van der Klink JJ, Terwee CB, Amick BC 3rd, Bültmann U. Evaluation of the measurement properties of self-reported health-related work-functioning instruments among workers with common mental disorders. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38:5–18.PubMedCrossRef

27.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN study reached international consensus on taxonomy, terminology, and definitions of measurement properties for health-related patient-reported outcomes. J Clin Epidemiol. 2010;63:737–45.PubMedCrossRef

28.

Mokkink LB, Terwee CB, Knol DL, Stratford PW, Alonso J, Patrick DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for evaluating the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties: a clarification of its content. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2010;10:22.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

29.

Mokking LB, Terwee CB, Patrick DL, Alonso J, Stratford PW, Knol DL, et al. The COSMIN checklist for assessing the methodological quality of studies on measurement properties of health status measurement instruments: an international Delphi study. Qual Life Res. 2010;19:539–49.CrossRef

30.

Ahlstrom L, Grimby-Ekman A, Hagberg M, Dellve L. The work ability index and single-item question: associations with sick leave, symptoms, and health: a prospective study of women on long-term sick leave. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2010;36:404–12.PubMedCrossRef

31.

El Fassi M, Bocquet V, Majery N, Lair ML, Couffignal S, Mairiaux P. Work ability assessment in a worker population: comparison and determinants of work ability index and work ability score. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:305.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

32.

Gould R, Ilmarinen J, Järvisalo J, Koskinen S. Dimensions of work ability. Results of the Health 2000 Survey (Internet). Finnish Centre for Pensions (ETK). 2008 (cited 2013 Sep 13); (pp. 25–34); Available from: http://www.etk.fi/fi/gateway/PTARGS_0_2712_459_440_3034_43/http%3B/content.etk.fi%3B7087/publishedcontent/publish/etkfi/fi/julkaisut/tutkimusjulkaisut/erillisjulkaisut/dimensions_of_work_ability_7.pdf.

33.

Kuijer PP, Gouttebarge V, Wind H, van Duivenbooden C, Sluiter JK, Frings-Dresen MH. Prognostic value of self-reported work ability and performance based lifting tests for sustainable return to work among construction workers. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2012;38:600–3.PubMedCrossRef

34.

Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60:34–42.PubMedCrossRef

35.

de Vet HCW, Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL. Mesurement in medicine: a practical guide. 1st ed. Cambridge, UK: The University Press Cambridge; 2011.

36.

Rhemtulla M, Brosseau-Liard PÉ, Savalei V. When can categorical variables be treated as continuous? A comparison of robust continuous and categorical SEM estimation methods under suboptimal conditions. Psychol Methods. 2012;17:354–73.PubMedCrossRef

37.

Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analyses for applied research. 1st ed. New York, USA: Guilford Press; 2006.

38.

Thompson B. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis: understanding concepts and applications. Washington, DC, USA: American Psychological Association; 2004.

39.

Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor analysis results: a review. J Educ Res. 2010;99:323–38.CrossRef

40.

Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use, vol. 4. New York: Oxford University Press Inc; 2008.CrossRef

41.

Evans JD. Straightforward statistics for the behavioral sciences. Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole Pub. Co.; 1996.

42.

Ilmarinen J, Tuomi K, Klockars M. Changes in the work ability of active employees over an 11-year period. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997;23(Suppl 1):49–57.PubMed

43.

Costa G, Sartori S. Ageing, working hours and work ability. Ergonomics. 2007;50:1914–30.PubMedCrossRef

44.

van den Berg TI, Elders LA, de Zwart BC, Burdorf A. The effects of work-related and individual factors on the work ability index: a systematic review. Occup Environ Med. 2009;66:211–20.PubMedCrossRef

45.

Koolhaas W, van der Klink JJ, Groothoff JW, Brouwer S. Towards a sustainable healthy working life: associations between chronological age, functional age and work outcomes. Eur J Public Health. 2012;22:424–9.PubMedCrossRef

46.

Soer R, Brouwer S, Geertzen JH, van der Schans CP, Groothoff JW, Reneman MF. Decline of functional capacity in healthy aging workers. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2012;93:2326–32.PubMedCrossRef

47.

Observatorio Estatal de Condiciones de Trabajo [Internet]. VI Encuesta Nacional de Condiciones de Trabajo. (cited 2013); (about 117 screen, pages 21–23); Available from: http://www.oect.es/Observatorio/Contenidos/InformesPropios/Desarrollados/Ficheros/Informe_VI_ENCT.pdf.

48.

Shah D. Healthy worker effect phenomenon. Indian J Occup Environ Med. 2009;13:77–9.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef

Titel: Reliability and Validity of the Work Role Functioning Questionnaire (Spanish Version)
verfasst von: Jose M. Ramada
Consol Serra
Benjamin C. Amick III
Femke I. Abma
Juan R. Castaño
Gemma Pidemunt
Ute Bültmann
George L. Delclos
Publikationsdatum: 01.12.2014
Verlag: Springer US
Erschienen in: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation / Ausgabe 4/2014
Print ISSN: 1053-0487
Elektronische ISSN: 1573-3688
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-013-9495-0

Springer Medizin

Abstract

Bitte loggen Sie sich ein, um Zugang zu diesem Inhalt zu erhalten

Weitere Artikel der Ausgabe 4/2014

Influence of Health on Job-Search Behavior and Re-employment: The Role of Job-Search Cognitions and Coping Resources

A Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Functional Capacity Evaluation and Functional Interviewing as Components of Occupational Rehabilitation Programs

A Prospective Study of the Association Between the Readiness for Return to Work Scale and Future Work Participation in Norway

Are Work Disability Prevention Interventions Effective for the Management of Neck Pain or Upper Extremity Disorders? A Systematic Review by the Ontario Protocol for Traffic Injury Management (OPTIMa) Collaboration

Vocational Rehabilitation Program Evaluation: Comparison Group Challenges and the Role of Unmeasured Return-to-Work Expectations

Factors Related to Employers’ Intent to Hire, Retain and Accommodate Cancer Survivors: The Singapore Perspective