Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Validity and Reliability of the 8-Item Work Limitations Questionnaire

  • Published:
Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate factorial validity, scale reliability, test–retest reliability, convergent validity, and discriminant validity of the 8-item Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) among employees from a public university system. Methods A secondary analysis using de-identified data from employees who completed an annual Health Assessment between the years 2009–2015 tested research aims. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) (n = 10,165) tested the latent structure of the 8-item WLQ. Scale reliability was determined using a CFA-based approach while test–retest reliability was determined using the intraclass correlation coefficient. Convergent/discriminant validity was tested by evaluating relations between the 8-item WLQ with health/performance variables for convergent validity (health-related work performance, number of chronic conditions, and general health) and demographic variables for discriminant validity (gender and institution type). Results A 1-factor model with three correlated residuals demonstrated excellent model fit (CFI = 0.99, TLI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.03, and SRMR = 0.01). The scale reliability was acceptable (0.69, 95% CI 0.68–0.70) and the test–retest reliability was very good (ICC = 0.78). Low-to-moderate associations were observed between the 8-item WLQ and the health/performance variables while weak associations were observed between the demographic variables. Conclusions The 8-item WLQ demonstrated sufficient reliability and validity among employees from a public university system. Results suggest the 8-item WLQ is a usable alternative for studies when the more comprehensive 25-item WLQ is not available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Rezaee ME, Pollock M. Prevalence and associated cost and utilization of multiple chronic conditions in the outpatient setting among adult members of an employer-based health plan. Popul Health Manag. 2015;18:421–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Goetzel RZ, Long SR, Ozminkowski RJ, Hawkins K, Wang S, Lynch W. Health, absence, disability, and presenteeism cost estimates of certain physical and mental health conditions affecting U.S. employers. J Occup Environ Med. 2004;46:398–412.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Loeppke R, Taitel M, Haufle V, Parry T, Kessler RC, Jinnett K. Health and productivity as a business strategy: a multiemployer study. J Occup Environ Med. 2009;51:411–28.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  4. Mattke S, Balakrishnan A, Bergamo G, Newberry SJ. A review of methods to measure health-related productivity loss. Am J Manag Care. 2007;13:211–7.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Lofland JH, Pizzi L, Frick KD. A review of health-related workplace productivity loss instruments. Pharmacoeconomics. 2004;22:165–84.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Lerner D, Amick B III, Rogers W, Malspeis S, Bungay K, Cynn D. The work limitations questionnaire. Med Care. 2001;39:72–85.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Amick B III, Gimeno D. Measuring work outcomes with a focus on health-related work productivity loss. In: Wittink H, Carr D, editors. Pain management: evidence, outcomes and quality of life: a sourcebook. New York: Elsevier; 2008. pp. 329–43.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Lerner D, Amick BC, Lee JC, Rooney T, Rogers WH, Chang H, et al. Relationship of employee-reported work limitations to work productivity. Med Care. 2003;41:649–59.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Grossmeier J. Program measurement and evaluation guide: core metrics for employee health management. Chapter 7: productivity and performance. 2016. Available from: http://hero-health.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/02/HERO-PHA-Metrics-Guide-FINAL.pdf.

  10. Mitchell RJ, Bates P. Measuring health-related productivity loss. Popul. Health Manag. 2011;14:93–8.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Walsh J a, McFadden ML, Morgan MD, Sawitzke AD, Duffin KC, Krueger GG, et al. Work productivity loss and fatigue in psoriatic arthritis. J Rheumatol. 2014;41:1670–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Burton WN, Chen C-Y, Li X, Schultz AB, Abrahamsson H. The association of self-reported employee physical activity with metabolic syndrome, health care costs, absenteeism, and presenteeism. J Occup Environ Med. 2014;56:919–26.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with Mplus: basic concepts, applications, and programming. New York: Routledge; 2012.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Muthén LK, Muthén BO. Mplus user's guide. 7th ed. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén; (1998–2015).

  15. Raykov T. Estimation of congeneric scale reliability using covariance structure analysis with nonlinear constraints. Br J Math Stat Psychol. 2001;54:315–23.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Raykov T. Behavioral scale reliability and measurement invariance evaluation using latent variable modeling. Behav Ther. 2004;35:299–331.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Brown TA. Confirmatory factor analysis for applied research. Second. New York: Guilford Press; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 4th ed. New York: Oxford University Press; 2008.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  19. Brown TA, White KS, Forsyth JP, Barlow DH. The structure of perceived emotional control: psychometric properties of a revised anxiety control questionnaire. Behav. Ther. 2004;35:75–99.

    Google Scholar 

  20. McGraw KO, Wong SP. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods. 1996;1:30–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. StataCorp Stata Statistical Software: Release 13. 2013.

  22. Landis R, Edwards B, Corina J. Correlated residuals among items in the estimation of measurement models. In: Lance CE, Vandenberg RJ, editors. Statisical methodological myths and urban legends: Doctrine, verity, and fable in the organizational and social sciences. New York: Routledge, 2009. pp. 195–214.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Cheung GW, Rensvold RB. Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Struct. Equ. Model. A Multidiscip. J. 2002;9:233–55.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Warner R. Applied statistics: from bivariate through multivariate techniques. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Tang K, Beaton DE, Amick BC, Hogg-Johnson S, Côtè P, Loisel P. Confirmatory factor analysis of the work limitations questionnaire (wlq-25) in workers’ compensation claimants with chronic upper-limb disorders. J Occup Rehabil. 2013;23:228–38.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Verhoef J a. C, Miedema HS, Bramsen I, Roebroeck ME. Using the work limitations questionnaire in patients with a chronic condition in the Netherlands. J Occup Environ Med. 2012;54:1293–9.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  27. Tamminga SJ, Verbeek JHAM, Frings-Dresen MHW, De Boer AGEM. Measurement properties of the work limitations questionnaire were sufficient among cancer survivors. Qual Life Res. 2014;23:515–25.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandek B. SF-36 health survey manual and interpretation guide. Bost. New Engl. Med. Cent. 1993;1–22.

  29. Burton WN, Chen C-Y, Conti DJ, Schultz AB, Edington DW. The association between health risk change and presenteeism change. J Occup Environ Med. 2006;48:252–63.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  30. Burton WN, Chen C-Y, Conti DJ, Schultz AB, Pransky G, Edington DW. The association of health risks with on-the-job productivity. J Occup Environ Med. 2005;47:769–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Alker HJ, Wang ML, Pbert L, Thorsen N, Lemon SC. Impact of school staff health on work productivity in secondary schools in Massachusetts. J Sch Health. 2015;85:398–404.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  32. Cash SW, Beresford SAA, Henderson JA, McTiernan A, Xiao L, Wang CY, et al. Dietary and physical activity behaviours related to obesity-specific quality of life and work productivity: baseline results from a worksite trial. Br J Nutr. 2012;1134–42.

  33. O’Connell SE, Jackson BR, Edwardson CL, Yates T, Biddle SJH, Davies MJ, et al. Providing NHS staff with height-adjustable workstations and behaviour change strategies to reduce workplace sitting time: protocol for the Stand More AT (SMArT) Work cluster randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health. 2015;15:1219.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by The University of Texas System Office of Employee Benefits; Postdoctoral Fellowship, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston School of Public Health Cancer Education and Career Development Program – National Cancer Institute/NIH Grant R25 CA57712; and partial support from the Center for Health Promotion and Prevention Research.

Disclaimer

The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Cancer Institute or the National Institute of Health.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Promotion and Behavioral Sciences, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 7000 Fannin Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Timothy J. Walker & Pamela M. Diamond

  2. Department of Management, Policy and Community Health, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, 1200 Pressler Street, Houston, TX, 77030, USA

    Jessica M. Tullar

  3. Department of Epidemiology, Human Genetics and Environmental Sciences, School of Public Health, The University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Austin, TX, USA

    Harold W. Kohl III

  4. Department of Kinesiology and Health Education, The University of Texas at Austin, 1616 Guadalupe, Austin, TX, 78701, USA

    Harold W. Kohl III

  5. Department of Health Policy and Management, Robert Stempel College of Public Health and Social Work, Florida International University, AHC5 4534 11200 SW 8th Street, Miami, FL, 33199, USA

    Benjamin C. Amick III

  6. Institute for Work and Health, Toronto, ON, Canada

    Benjamin C. Amick III

Authors
  1. Timothy J. Walker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jessica M. Tullar
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Pamela M. Diamond
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Harold W. Kohl III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Benjamin C. Amick III
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Timothy J. Walker.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Walker, T.J., Tullar, J.M., Diamond, P.M. et al. Validity and Reliability of the 8-Item Work Limitations Questionnaire. J Occup Rehabil 27, 576–583 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-016-9687-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-016-9687-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation