Musculoskeletal care · 2023
Psychometric testing of the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale in employed people with fibromyalgia.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Hammond Alison, Tennant Alan, Brown Tamara, Prior Yeliz, Ching Angela, Parker Jennifer
Аннотация
OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to establish whether the Rheumatoid Arthritis Work Instability Scale (RA-WIS), in its current form, is applicable for use with employed people with fibromyalgia (FM) to identify the risk of work disability and need for work rehabilitation.
METHODS: Content validity was first investigated using cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the RA-WIS and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale) and health (FM Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQ-R) scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability.
RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 13 participants with FM. All RA-WIS items were considered very or extremely relevant by almost all participants, with only one suggesting other items (anxiety and brain fog). Questionnaire responses were analysed from 156 employed participants: 94% women; 45.71 (SD 10.05) years of age; with time since FM diagnosis 2.99 (4.17) years (symptom duration 8.36 (SD 7.16) years). The RA-WIS mostly satisfied Rasch model requirements and a Rasch transformation scale was created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.55-0.66) with work scales and the FIQ-R. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in FM, not individual level use. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficient (2, 1) = 0.90.
DISCUSSION: The RA-WIS is valid and reliable for group use in employed people with FM. However, further work is needed to develop a WIS for individual use in FM.
METHODS: Content validity was first investigated using cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants completed a postal questionnaire. Construct validity was assessed using Rasch analysis. Concurrent validity included testing between the RA-WIS and work (e.g., Workplace Activity Limitations Scale) and health (FM Impact Questionnaire-Revised (FIQ-R) scales. Two weeks later, participants were mailed a second questionnaire to measure test-retest reliability.
RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 13 participants with FM. All RA-WIS items were considered very or extremely relevant by almost all participants, with only one suggesting other items (anxiety and brain fog). Questionnaire responses were analysed from 156 employed participants: 94% women; 45.71 (SD 10.05) years of age; with time since FM diagnosis 2.99 (4.17) years (symptom duration 8.36 (SD 7.16) years). The RA-WIS mostly satisfied Rasch model requirements and a Rasch transformation scale was created. Concurrent validity was generally good (rs = 0.55-0.66) with work scales and the FIQ-R. Internal consistency (Person Separation Index values) was consistent with group use in FM, not individual level use. Test-retest reliability was excellent, with intraclass coefficient (2, 1) = 0.90.
DISCUSSION: The RA-WIS is valid and reliable for group use in employed people with FM. However, further work is needed to develop a WIS for individual use in FM.