Anders Hansen, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Reuben Escorpizo, Karen Søgaard, Jens Søndergaard, Berit Schiøttz-Christensen, Ole Steen Mortensen
{"title":"顽固性腰痛患者工作康复问卷领域的可靠性和结构有效性","authors":"Anders Hansen, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Reuben Escorpizo, Karen Søgaard, Jens Søndergaard, Berit Schiøttz-Christensen, Ole Steen Mortensen","doi":"10.1007/s10926-024-10248-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) assesses patient functioning, including psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. This study evaluates the WORQ domains in individuals with persistent low back pain (LBP), focusing on reliability and construct validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals aged 18-65 with LBP completed WORQ and the workability index single item. A subgroup undertook sit-to-stand and 6-min walking tests and re-evaluated WORQ after 14 days. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency (McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability, and smallest detectable change. Construct validity was analyzed via Spearman's rank correlation and known group validity, with physical functioning also examined against sit-to-stand and 6-min walk test results for sensitivity/specificity. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed through classical and scale width methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 425 participants, 149 completed physical tests, and 102 re-assessed WORQ. McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha indicated high internal consistency (0.92-0.96) with strong test-retest reliability (intraclass-correlation coefficients: 0.74-0.82). The smallest detectable change ranged from 4.62 to 7.82. Predictions from 7 out of 8 hypotheses were confirmed. Notable differences in domain scores were observed based on disability level and sick leave status, with varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items. Potential floor effects were noted using the scale width method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The WORQ demonstrated good reliability and satisfactory validity in assessing work-related functioning in individuals with persistent LBP. These findings support its use as a comprehensive tool for evaluating psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. However, varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items and potential floor effects suggest cautious interpretation in diverse clinical settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":48035,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-08","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Reliability and Construct Validity of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire Domains in Patients with Persistent Low Back Pain.\",\"authors\":\"Anders Hansen, Henrik Hein Lauridsen, Reuben Escorpizo, Karen Søgaard, Jens Søndergaard, Berit Schiøttz-Christensen, Ole Steen Mortensen\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s10926-024-10248-1\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) assesses patient functioning, including psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. This study evaluates the WORQ domains in individuals with persistent low back pain (LBP), focusing on reliability and construct validity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individuals aged 18-65 with LBP completed WORQ and the workability index single item. A subgroup undertook sit-to-stand and 6-min walking tests and re-evaluated WORQ after 14 days. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency (McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability, and smallest detectable change. Construct validity was analyzed via Spearman's rank correlation and known group validity, with physical functioning also examined against sit-to-stand and 6-min walk test results for sensitivity/specificity. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed through classical and scale width methods.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of 425 participants, 149 completed physical tests, and 102 re-assessed WORQ. McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha indicated high internal consistency (0.92-0.96) with strong test-retest reliability (intraclass-correlation coefficients: 0.74-0.82). The smallest detectable change ranged from 4.62 to 7.82. Predictions from 7 out of 8 hypotheses were confirmed. Notable differences in domain scores were observed based on disability level and sick leave status, with varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items. Potential floor effects were noted using the scale width method.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The WORQ demonstrated good reliability and satisfactory validity in assessing work-related functioning in individuals with persistent LBP. These findings support its use as a comprehensive tool for evaluating psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. However, varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items and potential floor effects suggest cautious interpretation in diverse clinical settings.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48035,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-08\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-024-10248-1\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-024-10248-1","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
Reliability and Construct Validity of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire Domains in Patients with Persistent Low Back Pain.
Purpose: The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) assesses patient functioning, including psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. This study evaluates the WORQ domains in individuals with persistent low back pain (LBP), focusing on reliability and construct validity.
Methods: Individuals aged 18-65 with LBP completed WORQ and the workability index single item. A subgroup undertook sit-to-stand and 6-min walking tests and re-evaluated WORQ after 14 days. Reliability was assessed through internal consistency (McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha), test-retest reliability, and smallest detectable change. Construct validity was analyzed via Spearman's rank correlation and known group validity, with physical functioning also examined against sit-to-stand and 6-min walk test results for sensitivity/specificity. Floor and ceiling effects were assessed through classical and scale width methods.
Results: Of 425 participants, 149 completed physical tests, and 102 re-assessed WORQ. McDonald's omega and Cronbach's alpha indicated high internal consistency (0.92-0.96) with strong test-retest reliability (intraclass-correlation coefficients: 0.74-0.82). The smallest detectable change ranged from 4.62 to 7.82. Predictions from 7 out of 8 hypotheses were confirmed. Notable differences in domain scores were observed based on disability level and sick leave status, with varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items. Potential floor effects were noted using the scale width method.
Conclusions: The WORQ demonstrated good reliability and satisfactory validity in assessing work-related functioning in individuals with persistent LBP. These findings support its use as a comprehensive tool for evaluating psychological, physical, and cognitive limitations. However, varied diagnostic performance in physical functioning items and potential floor effects suggest cautious interpretation in diverse clinical settings.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation is an international forum for the publication of peer-reviewed original papers on the rehabilitation, reintegration, and prevention of disability in workers. The journal offers investigations involving original data collection and research synthesis (i.e., scoping reviews, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses). Papers derive from a broad array of fields including rehabilitation medicine, physical and occupational therapy, health psychology and psychiatry, orthopedics, oncology, occupational and insurance medicine, neurology, social work, ergonomics, biomedical engineering, health economics, rehabilitation engineering, business administration and management, and law. A single interdisciplinary source for information on work disability rehabilitation, the Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation helps to advance the scientific understanding, management, and prevention of work disability.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
