Health impairment often leads to work impairment in the form of both absenteeism and presenteeism (i.e. reduced productivity while at work). Several self-report productivity instruments have been designed over the past few years to measure the impact of illness on productivity at work and/or in non-work activities.
In a review of the literature we identified six generic subjective instruments — the Endicott Work Productivity Scale, Health and Labor Questionnaire, Health and Work Questionnaire, Health and Work Performance Questionnaire, Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) and the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment Questionnaire (WPAI) — that could theoretically be used in any working population. These instruments were usually validated against other subjective measures (such as health-related QOL).
Each productivity instrument has benefits in certain research settings, but the psychometric properties of the WPAI have been assessed most extensively. It was the most frequently used instrument and has also been modified to measure productivity reductions associated with specific diseases (e.g. allergic rhinitis, gastro-oesophageal reflux disease, chronic hand dermatitis). The WLQ has also been tested extensively to measure the general health impact and impact of specific conditions. Two migraine-specific subjective instruments were also identified: the Migraine Disability Assessment questionnaire and the Migraine Work and Productivity Loss Questionnaire, of which the latter was found to have better psychometric properties.
Productivity outcomes are useful in that they characterise the impact of an illness in the workplace and show the effect of treatment on productivity. Evidence of psychometric properties and generalisability of different instruments was found to a varying degree. Thus, further research is needed to assess the accuracy and usefulness of individual instruments in certain research settings. Health-related productivity has been increasingly recognised as an important component of the burden of illness associated with a given disease; without it, one cannot reliably assess this burden.
Migraine Allergic Rhinitis Fexofenadine Productivity Instrument Work Limitation Questionnaire
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
The authors received funding from AstraZeneca R&D Mölndal, Mölndal, Sweden for the preparation of this manuscript.
Gold MR. Cost-effectiveness in health and medicine. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996Google Scholar
Lerner DJ, Amick III BC, Malspeis S, et al. A national survey of health-related work limitations among employed persons in the United States. Disabil Rehabil 2000; 22 (5): 225–32PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ware J. SF-36 health study: manual and interpretation guide. Boston (MA): Health Outcomes Trust, 1993Google Scholar
Shumaker S, Anderson R. Psychological tests and scales. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life assessments in clinical trials. New York: Raven Press, 1990: 95–113Google Scholar
Juniper E, Guyatt G, Jaeschke R. How to develop and validate a new health-related quality of life instrument. In: Spilker B, editor. Quality of life and pharmacoeconomics in clinical trials. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott-Raven Publishers, 1996: 49–56Google Scholar
Brazier J, Deverill M. A checklist for judging preference-based measures of health related quality of life: learning from psychometrics. Health Econ 1999; 8 (1): 41–51PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
McDowell I, Newell C. Measuring health: a guide to rating scales and questionnaires. 2nd ed. New York: Oxford University Press, 1996Google Scholar
Bowling A. Measuring health: a review of quality of life measurement scales. 2nd ed. Buckingham (PA): Open University Press, 1997Google Scholar
Nunnally JC, Bernstein IH. Psychometric theory. New York (NY): McGraw Hill, 1994Google Scholar
Hays R, Anderson R. Assessing reliability and validity of measurement in clinical trials. In: Staquet M, Hays R, Fayers P. Quality of life assessment in clinical trials: methods and practice. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1998Google Scholar
Sudman S, Bradburn NM, Schwarz N. Thinking about answers: the application of cognitive processes to survey methodology. San Francisco (CA): Jossey-Bas Publishers, 1996Google Scholar
Burke L, Piault E. Patient-reported measures in drug development: FDA perspective. In: Chassany C, Caulin C. Healthrelated quality of life and patient-reported outcomes: scientific and useful outcome criteria. Paris: Springer-Verlag, 2003: 117–22Google Scholar
Stewart WF, Ricci J, Leotta CR, et al. Self-report of healthrelated lost productivity work time: bias and the optimal recall period [abstract]. Value Health 2001; 4: A421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Endicott J, Nee J. Endicott Work Productivity Scale (EWPS): a new measure to assess treatment effects. Psychopharmacol Bull 1997; 33 (1): 13–6PubMedGoogle Scholar
van Roijen L, Essink-Bot ML, Koopmanschap MA, et al. Labor and health status in economic evaluation of health care: the health and labor questionnaire. Int J Technol Assess Health Care 1996; 12 (3): 405–15PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kessler RC, Barber C, Beck A, et al. The World Health Organization health and work performance questionnaire (HPQ). J Occup Environ Med 2003; 45: 156–74PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Halpern MT, Shikiar R, Rentz AM, et al. Impact of smoking status on workplace absenteeism and productivity. Tob Control 2001; 10 (3): 233–8PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly MC, Zbrozek AS, Dukes EM. The validity and reproducibility of a work productivity and activity impairment instrument. Pharmacoeconomics 1993; 4 (5): 353–65PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly M, Tanner A, Meltzer EO. Work, classroom, and activity impairment instruments: validation studies in allergic rhinitis. Clin Drug Invest 1996; 11 (5): 278–88CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wahlqvist P, Carlsson J, Stalhammar NO, et al. Validity of a work productivity and activity impairment questionnaire for patients with symptoms of gastro-esophageal reflux disease (WPAI-GERD): results from a cross-sectional study. Value Health 2002; 5 (2): 106–13PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Reilly MC, Lavin PT, Kahler KH, et al. Validation of the dermatology life quality index and the work productivity and activity impairment-chronic hand dermatitis questionnaire in chronic hand dermatitis. J Am Acad Dermatol 2003; 48 (1): 128–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner K, et al. Reliability of the migraine disability assessment score in a population-based sample of headache sufferers. Cephalalgia 1999; 19 (2): 107–14PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stewart WF, Lipton RB, Kolodner KB, et al. Validity of the migraine disability assessment (MIDAS) score in comparison to a diary-based measure in a population sample of migraine sufferers. Pain 2000; 88 (1): 41–52PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner DJ, Amick III BC, Malspeis S, et al. The migraine work and productivity loss questionnaire: concepts and design. Qual Life Res 1999; 8 (8): 699–710PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davies GM, Santanello N, Gerth W, et al. Validation of a migraine work and productivity loss questionnaire for use in migraine studies. Cephalalgia 1999; 19 (5): 497–502PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chirban JT, Jacobs RJ, Warren J, et al. The 36-item short form health survey (SF-36) and the work productivity and activity impairment (WPAI) questionnaire in panic disorder. Dis Manage Health Outcomes 1997; 1 (3): 154–64CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lerner D, Reed JI, Massarotti E, et al. The work limitations questionnaire’s validity and reliability among patients with osteoarthritis. J Clin Epidemiol 2002; 55 (2): 197–208PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Osterhaus JT, Gutterman DL, Plachetka JR. Healthcare resource and lost labour costs of migraine headache in the US. Pharmacoeconomics 1992; 2 (1): 67–76PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopmanschap MA, van Ineveld BM. Towards a new approach for estimating indirect costs of disease. Soc Sci Med 1992; 34 (9): 1005–10PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. The impact of indirect costs on outcomes of health care programs. Health Econ 1994; 3 (6): 385–93PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brouwer WB, Koopmanschap MA, Rutten FF. Productivity costs measurement through quality of life?: a response to the recommendation of the Washington panel. Health Econ 1997; 6 (3): 253–9PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ettigi P, Meyerhoff AS, Chirban JT, et al. The quality of life and employment in panic disorder. J Nerv Ment Dis 1997; 185 (6): 368–72PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Meltzer EO, Casale TB, Nathan RA, et al. Once-daily fexofenadine HCl improves quality of life and reduces work and activity impairment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Ann Allergy Asthma Immunol 1999; 83 (4): 311–7PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Thompson AK, Finn AF, Schoenwetter WF. Effect of 60mg twice-daily fexofenadine HCl on quality of life, work and classroom productivity, and regular activity in patients with chronic idiopathic urticaria. J Am Acad Dermatol 2000; 43 (1 Pt 1): 24–30PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacobs RJ, Davidson JR, Gupta S, et al. The effects of clonazepam on quality of life and work productivity in panic disorder. Am J Manag Care 1997; 3 (8): 1187–96PubMedGoogle Scholar
Tanner L, Reilly M, Meltzer EO, et al. Effect of fexofenadine HCl on quality of life and work, classroom and daily activity impairment in patients with seasonal allergic rhinitis. Am J Manag Care 1999; 5 Suppl. 4: S235–47Google Scholar
Wittchen HU, Beloch E. The impact of social phobia on quality of life. Int Clin Psychopharmacol 1996; 11 Suppl. 3: 15–23PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dean BB, Crawley JA, Schmitt CM, et al. The burden of illness of gastro-oesophageal reflux disease: impact on work productivity. Aliment Pharmacol Ther 2003; 17: 1309–17PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar