Content Comparison of Worker Productivity Questionnaires in Arthritis and Musculoskeletal Conditions Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health Framework
- 337 Downloads
Background Worker productivity outcome is essential in examining the rehabilitation of workers with arthritis and other musculoskeletal conditions. There is great variation in the contents of worker productivity questionnaires. The International Classification of Functioning Disability and Health (ICF) offers the possibility to serve as a reference to describe and compare the contents of these questionnaires. Methods A literature review identified published self-report worker productivity questionnaires. All meaningful concepts were identified and linked to the corresponding ICF category according to established rules. Results Eighteen questionnaires were identified which contained a total of 519 meaningful concepts and which were linked to 64 unique 2nd level ICF categories. All questionnaires addressed Activities and Participation, thirteen (72%) addressed Body Functions, seven (39%) addressed Environmental Factors, seven (39%) addressed Personal Factors and only one questionnaire (6%) for Body Structures component. Overall, Work Role Functioning (WRF) questionnaire addressed the most number of different categories while Quantity and Quality method contained only one ICF category. The Rheumatoid Arthritis-Work Instability Scale had the highest number of categories for Body Functions, the Work Activity Limitations Scale and WRF had the most number of categories for Activities and Participation. The Health and Labour Questionnaire had the highest number of categories referring to unpaid work participation. The Health and Work Questionnaire was the only that included contextualization of both Environmental and Personal Factors. Conclusion Self-report worker productivity questionnaires differed largely in their contents. This content analysis study could guide us in selecting an appropriate questionnaire for a specific study question.
KeywordsOutcomes assessment Work Questionnaires Arthritis Absenteeism Presenteeism
We would like to thank the ICF Research Branch for the kind support, Edda Amman who assisted in the linking process, and Barbara Kollerits who provided statistical support and also assisted in linking. Special thanks to OMERACT, collaborators of this study, questionnaire developers and their support staff, and Brittany Norton for providing assistance in preparing the manuscript.
- 1.World Health Organization. The burden of musculoskeletal conditions at the start of the new millenium. WHO Technical Report Series 919; 2002.Google Scholar
- 3.Australian Institute of Health and Welfare 2005. Arthritis and musculoskeletal conditions in Australia. AIHW Cat. No. PHE67; 2005.Google Scholar
- 4.United States Joint and Bone Decade. The burden of musculoskeletal diseases in the United States. Rosemont: American Academy of Orthopedic Surgeons; 2008. p. 1–19.Google Scholar
- 25.World Health Organization. International classification of functioning, disability, and health: ICF. Geneva: WHO; 2001.Google Scholar
- 26.Brockow T, Cieza A, Kuhlow H, Sigl T, Franke T, Harder M, et al. Identifying the concepts contained in outcome measures of clinical trials on musculoskeletal disorders and chronic widespread pain using the international classification of functioning, disability and health as a reference. J Rehabil Med. 2004;44(Suppl):30–6.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 28.Stamm T, Geyh S, Cieza A, Machold K, Kollerits B, Kloppenburg M, et al. Measuring functioning in patients with hand osteoarthritis—content comparison of questionnaires based on the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). Rheumatology (Oxford). 2006;45:1534–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 31.Geyh S, Kurt T, Brockow T, Cieza A, Ewert T, Omar Z, et al. Identifying the concepts contained in outcome measures of clinical trials on stroke using the international classification of functioning, disability and health as a reference. J Rehabil Med. 2004;44(Suppl):56–62.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 33.Efron B. The jackknife, the bootstrap and other resampling plans. Philadelphia: Society for industrial and applied mathematics; 1982.Google Scholar
- 34.Vierkant RA. A SAS macro for calculating bootstrapped confidence intervals about a Kappa coefficient [homepage on the Internet]. Available from: http://www2.sas.com/proceedings/sugi22/STATS/PAPER295.PDF.
- 37.Kumar RN, Hass SL, Li JZ, Nickens DJ, Daenzer CL, Wathen LK. Validation of the health-related productivity questionnaire diary (HRPQ-D) on a sample of patients with infectious mononucleosis: results from a phase 1 multicenter clinical trial. J Occup Environ Med. 2003;45:899–907.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
- 38.Koopmanschap M, Meerding WJ, Evers S, Severens J, Burdorf A, Brouwer W. Productivity and disease questionnaire-PRODISQ versie 2.1 (in Dutch). 2004.Google Scholar
- 48.Dreinhöfer K, Stucki G, Ewert T, Huber E, Ebenbichler G, Gutenbrunner C, et al. ICF core sets for osteoarthritis. J Rehabil Med. 2004;36(Suppl):75–80.Google Scholar