Search

Objective: The aims were to validate linguistically British‐English versions of the Perceived Workplace Support Scale (PWSS), Work Accommodations, Benefits, Policies and Practices Scale (WABPPS), and Work Transitions Index (WTI) in rheumatoid arthritis (RA), axial spondyloarthritis (axSpA), osteoarthritis (OA) and fibromyalgia (FM). Methods: The three scales were adapted into British‐English and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed postal questionnaires. Construct validity for the PWSS was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work, job strain and work‐life balance scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test‐retest reliability. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.50 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.70 (SD 8.00) years. The PWSS satisfied Rasch model requirements. Concurrent validity was mostly as hypothesised, that is, weak to moderate negative correlations for the PWSS (rs = 0.07 to −0.61), and weak to moderate positive correlations for the WABPPS and WTI (rs = 0.20–0.52). Some correlations were stronger, mostly in axSpA. Internal consistency (Cronbach's alpha) for all three scales was consistent with group use in all conditions. Test‐retest reliability was generally excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80–0.93 for the three scales in the four conditions. Discussion: Reliable, valid versions of the British‐English PWSS, WABPPS, and WTI are now available for use in research, organisational level studies and vocational rehabilitation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: The aims were to validate linguistically British‐English versions of the Long‐Term Conditions Job Strain Scale (LTCJSS), Long‐Term Conditions Work Spillover Scale (LTCWSS) and Work‐Health‐Personal Life Perceptions Scale (WHPLPS) in rheumatoid arthritis, axial spondyloarthritis, osteoarthritis and fibromyalgia (FM). Methods: The three scales were forward translated and reviewed by an expert panel prior to cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the three scales and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale [WALS]) and condition‐specific health scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test‐retest reliability. Results: The questionnaire was completed by 831 employed participants: 68% women, 53.5 (SD 8.9) years of age, with condition duration 7.7 (SD 8.0) years. The LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 satisfied Rasch model requirements, but Part 3 did not. A Rasch transformation scale and Reference Metric equating scales with the WALS were created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.41–0.85) for the three scales, except the WHPLPS Part 3. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in all conditions, and individual use except for the LTCWSS and WHPLSP Parts 1 and 2 in FM. Test‐retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficients (2,1) of 0.80–0.96 for the three scales in the four conditions. Discussion: Reliable, valid versions of the British‐English LTCJSS, LTCWSS and WHPLPS Parts 1 and 2 are now available for use in the UK. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose Sensibility refers to a tool's comprehensiveness, understandability, relevance, feasibility, and length. It is used in the early development phase to begin assessing a new tool or intervention. This study examined the sensibility of the job demands and accommodation planning tool (JDAPT). The JDAPT identifies job demands related to physical, cognitive, interpersonal, and working conditions to better target strategies for workplace supports and accommodations aimed at assisting individuals with chronic health conditions. Methods Workers with a chronic health condition and workplace representatives were recruited from health charities, workplaces, and newsletters using convenience sampling. Cognitive interviews assessed the JDAPT's sensibility. A 70% endorsement rate was the minimum level of acceptability for sensibility concepts. A short screening tool also was administered, and answers compared to the complete JDAPT. Results Participants were 46 workers and 23 organizational representatives (n = 69). Endorsements highly exceeded the 70% cut-off for understandability, relevance, and length. Congruence between screening questions and the complete JDAPT suggested both workers and organizational representatives overlooked job demands when completing the screener. Participants provided additional examples and three new items to improve comprehensiveness. The JDAPT was rated highly relevant and useful, although not always easy to complete for someone with an episodic condition. Conclusions This study highlights the need for tools that facilitate accommodations for workers with episodic disabilities and provides early evidence for the sensibility of the JDAPT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]