Psychometric analysis of work organization and fatigue instruments and their relationship with occupational accidents: a structural equation modeling approach.

IF 2.7 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Mohammad Khandan, Ali Montazeri, Ali Ebrahimi
{"title":"Psychometric analysis of work organization and fatigue instruments and their relationship with occupational accidents: a structural equation modeling approach.","authors":"Mohammad Khandan, Ali Montazeri, Ali Ebrahimi","doi":"10.1186/s12913-025-12369-6","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Work organization significantly impacts occupational incidents and fatigue in hospital settings, particularly among nurses. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of instruments measuring work organization and fatigue and to examine their relationship with occupational accidents.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2019 with 200 nurses working in hospitals in Qom, Iran using the stratified sampling method. Data were collected using three standardized tools: the Work Organization Questionnaire, the Fatigue Checklist, and a demographic information questionnaire. Structural equation modeling was employed to analyze the data, while instrument validity and reliability were assessed through Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted (AVE). Analysis was performed using Smart PLS and SPSS V20.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The analysis revealed a significant relationship between work organization and occupational accidents (t = 3.22, p < 0.05). However, the relationships between work organization and fatigue (t = 0.03) and between fatigue and occupational accidents (t = 1.49) were not statistically significant. The Work Organization Questionnaire (WOAQ) demonstrated robust validity and reliability, making it suitable for assessing occupational risks in hospital environments. In contrast, the Fatigue Questionnaire (CIS) exhibited acceptable validity but insufficient reliability (Cronbach's alpha < 0.7), highlighting the need for further refinement.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study revealed that the Work Organization Questionnaire has acceptable validity and reliability, making it suitable for hospital settings, while the Fatigue Questionnaire requires further revision. It is recommended that hospital administrators optimize work schedules and provide fatigue management training, and policymakers utilize validated tools to reduce occupational risks and enhance workplace safety.</p>","PeriodicalId":9012,"journal":{"name":"BMC Health Services Research","volume":"25 1","pages":"239"},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11823028/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Health Services Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12913-025-12369-6","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Work organization significantly impacts occupational incidents and fatigue in hospital settings, particularly among nurses. This study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of instruments measuring work organization and fatigue and to examine their relationship with occupational accidents.

Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2019 with 200 nurses working in hospitals in Qom, Iran using the stratified sampling method. Data were collected using three standardized tools: the Work Organization Questionnaire, the Fatigue Checklist, and a demographic information questionnaire. Structural equation modeling was employed to analyze the data, while instrument validity and reliability were assessed through Cronbach's alpha, composite reliability, and average variance extracted (AVE). Analysis was performed using Smart PLS and SPSS V20.

Results: The analysis revealed a significant relationship between work organization and occupational accidents (t = 3.22, p < 0.05). However, the relationships between work organization and fatigue (t = 0.03) and between fatigue and occupational accidents (t = 1.49) were not statistically significant. The Work Organization Questionnaire (WOAQ) demonstrated robust validity and reliability, making it suitable for assessing occupational risks in hospital environments. In contrast, the Fatigue Questionnaire (CIS) exhibited acceptable validity but insufficient reliability (Cronbach's alpha < 0.7), highlighting the need for further refinement.

Conclusion: This study revealed that the Work Organization Questionnaire has acceptable validity and reliability, making it suitable for hospital settings, while the Fatigue Questionnaire requires further revision. It is recommended that hospital administrators optimize work schedules and provide fatigue management training, and policymakers utilize validated tools to reduce occupational risks and enhance workplace safety.

求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
BMC Health Services Research
BMC Health Services Research 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
4.40
自引率
7.10%
发文量
1372
审稿时长
6 months
期刊介绍: BMC Health Services Research is an open access, peer-reviewed journal that considers articles on all aspects of health services research, including delivery of care, management of health services, assessment of healthcare needs, measurement of outcomes, allocation of healthcare resources, evaluation of different health markets and health services organizations, international comparative analysis of health systems, health economics and the impact of health policies and regulations.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信