Abstract
Purpose The Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) was developed to evaluate work functioning in vocational rehabilitation, but was not yet available in Dutch. The goal of this study is twofold: a description of the cross-cultural adaptation process (part 1) of the WORQ to be used in Flanders (The Dutch speaking part of Belgium, WORQ-VL) and a presentation of the first psychometric testing of the WORQ-VL (part 2). Methods For part 1, the guidelines for cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures by Beaton et al. were used to structure the cross-cultural adaptation. For part 2, a cross-sectional study was conducted in patients with musculoskeletal disorders [sample A: hand and wrist rehabilitation (n = 21) and sample B: fibromyalgia patients (n = 93)] who completed the WORQ-VL. Internal consistency and factor structure were examined in the total sample, whereas convergent and discriminant validity of the WORQ-VL were researched in sample A. Results First results on the convergent validity and discriminant validity (small sample size) and internal consistency of the WORQ-VL are promising. The exploratory factor analysis revealed seven factors which were labeled as ‘cognition’, ‘physical’, ‘mood’, ‘activities of daily living’, ‘sensory’, ‘emotional’ and ‘social’. The best evidence was found for the ‘physical’ subscale of the WORQ-VL: strong correlations were found with the ‘physical functioning’ and ‘role limitations—physical’ subscales of the Short-Form Health Survey, respectively r = − .84 and r = − .59, p < .01. As expected, predominantly weak correlations were found with hand grip strength, kinesiophobia, hand-related aesthetics and satisfaction (ranging between r = − .38 and r = .34, p > .05). Conclusions The WORQ-VL is a user-friendly and valuable ICF-based self-report questionnaire to evaluate work functioning. Future studies are highly needed to examine the value of the WORQ within different patient populations and settings in order to examine further the added value of this self-report measure.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Stucki G, Brage S, Homa D, Escorpizo R. Chapter 1: conceptual framework: disability evaluation and vocational rehabilitation. In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 3–10.
Rinaldo U, Selander J. Return to work after vocational rehabilitation for sick-listed workers with long-term back, neck and shoulder problems: a follow-up study of factors involved. Work 2016;55(1):115–131.
Schultz IZ, Chleback CM, Law AK. Chapter 13: bridging the gap: evidence-informed early intervention practices for injured workers with nonvisible disabilities. In: Handbook of return to work: from research to practice. New York: Springer; 2016. pp. 223–253.
Jetha A, Pransky G, Fish J, Hettinger LJ. Return-to-work within a complex and dynamic organizational work disability system. J Occup Rehabil. 2016;26(3):276–285.
Escorpizo R, Finger ME, Glässel A, Gradinger F, Lückenkemper M, Cieza A. A systematic review of functioning in vocational rehabilitation using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):134–146.
Farholm A, Halvari H, Niemiec CP, Williams GC, Deci EL. Changes in return to work among patients in vocational rehabilitation: a self-determination theory perspective. Disabil Rehabil. 2017;39(20):2039–2046.
Escorpizo R, Reneman MF, Ekholm J, Fritz J, Krupa T, Marnetoft S, et al. A conceptual definition of vocational rehabilitation based on the ICF: building a shared model. J Occup Rehabil. 2011;21(2):126–133.
Alexander L, Cooper K, Mitchell D, MacLean C. Effectiveness of vocational rehabilitation on work participation in adults with musculoskeletal disorders: an umbrella review protocol. JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2017;15(6):1518–1521.
Escorpizo R, Finger ME, Reneman MF. Chapter 6: integration and application of the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF) in return to work. In: Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ, editors. Handbook of return to work. New York: Springer; 2016. pp. 99–118.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization; 2001.
Momsen AH, Stapelfeldt CM, Rosbjerg R, Escorpizo R, Labriola M, Bjerrum M. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in vocational rehabilitation: a scoping review of the state of the field. J Occup Rehabil. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9788-4.
Finger ME, Escorpizo R, Glässel A, Gmünder HP, Lückenkemper M, Chan C, et al. ICF Core Set for vocational rehabilitation: results of an international consensus conference. Disabil Rehabil. 2012; 34(5):429–438.
Finger ME, Escorpizo R, Bostan C, De Bie R. Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ): development and preliminary psychometric evidence of an ICF-based questionnaire for vocational rehabilitation. J Occup Rehabil. 2014;24(3):498–510.
Homa D, DeLambo D. Chapter 8: vocational assessment and job placement. In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 161–186.
Selb M, Finger ME, Escorpizo R. Chapter 24: applying the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire WORQ: a case illustrating its use in evaluating functioning of a person after a traumatic brain injury in an interprofessional vocational rehabilitation setting. In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 521–543.
Jensen MP. Chapter 21: motivational interviewing for enhancing return to work. In: Schultz IZ, Gatchel RJ, editors. Handbook of return to work. New York: Springer; 2016. pp. 365–379.
Portmann R, Bergamaschi R, Escorpizo R, Staubli S, Finger ME. Content validity of the work rehabilitation questionnaire-self-report version WORQ-SELF in a subgroup of spinal cord injury patients. Spinal Cord. 2014;52(3):225–230.
Finger ME, Wicki-Roten V, Leger B, Escorpizo R. Cross-cultural adaptation of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ) to French: a valid and reliable instrument to assess work functioning. J Occup Rehabil. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9795-5.
Finger ME, Selb M, De Bie R, Escorpizo R. Using the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health in physiotherapy in multidisciplinary vocational rehabilitation: a case study of low back pain. Physiother Res Int. 2015;20(4):231–241.
Finger ME, De Bie R, Nowak D, Escorpizo R. Chapter 23: development and testing of an ICF-based questionnaire to evaluate functioning in vocational rehabilitation: the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ). In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 495–520.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000;25(24):3186–3191.
Huijsmans R, Sluiter H, Aufdemkampe G. Michigan Hand Outcomes Questionnaire–Dutch Language Version. A questionnaire for patients with hand functioning problems. Fysiopraxis 2001;9:38–41.
Veehof MM, Sleegers EJ, van Veldhoven NH, Schuurman AH, van Meeteren NL. Psychometric qualities of the Dutch language version of the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder, and Hand Questionnaire (DASH-DLV). J Hand Ther. 2002;15(4):347–354.
Vlaeyen JWS, Kole-Snijders AMJ, Boeren RGB, Van Eek H. Fear of movement/(re)injury in chronic low back pain and its relation to behavioral performance. Pain 1995;62(3):363–372.
Razavai D, Gandek B. Testing Dutch and French translations of the SF-36 health survey among Belgian angina patients. J Clin Epidemiol. 1998;51(11):975–981.
Terwee CB, Bot SD, de Boer MR, van der Windt DA, Knol DL, Dekker J, et al. Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. J Clin Epidemiol. 2007;60(1):34–42.
Marx RG, Menezes A, Horovitz L, Jones EC, Warren RF. A comparison of two time intervals for test-retest reliability of health status instruments. J Clin Epidemiol. 2003;56(8):730–735.
Koo TK, Li MY. A guideline of selecting and reporting intraclass correlation coefficients for reliability research. J Chiropr Med. 2016;15(2):155–163.
Tabachnick CB. Using multivariate statistics. Boston: Pearson Education Inc; 2007.
Cohen J. Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Hillsdale: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1988.
Stamm TA, Pieber K, Crevenna R, Dorner TE. Impairment in the activities of daily living in older adults with and without osteoporosis, osteoarthritis and chronic back pain: a secondary analysis of population-based health survey data. BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12891-016-0994-y.
Annemans L. Health economics for non-economists: an introduction to the concepts, methods and pitfalls of health economic evaluations. Gent: Academia Press; 2016.
Madden RH, Bundy A. The ICF has made a difference to functioning and disability measurement and statistics. Disabil Rehabil. 2018. https://doi.org/10.1080/09638288.2018.1431812.
Polit DF. Getting serious about test-retest reliability: a critique of retest research and some recommendations. Qual Life Res. 2014;23(6):1713–1720.
Ware JE, Snow KK, Kosinski M, Gandenk B. SF-36 health survey: manual and interpretation guide. Boston: The Health Institute, New England Medical Center; 1993.
Nelson EC, Eftimovska EE, Lind C, Hager A, Wasson JH. Patient reported outome measures in practice. BMJ. 2015. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.g7818.
Terwee CB, Mokkink LB, Knol DL, Ostelo RWJG, Bouter LM, de Vet HCW. Rating the methodological quality in systematic reviews of studies on measurement properties: a scoring system for the COSMIN checklist. Qual Lif Res. 2012;21(4):651–657.
Selb M, Glässel A, Escorpizo R. Chapter 22: ICF-based tools in rehabilitation toward return to work: facilitating inter-professional communication and comprehensive documentation. In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 471–494.
Black O, Keegel T, Sim MR, Collie A, Smith P. The effect of self-efficacy on return-to-work outcomes for workers with psychological or upper-body musculoskeletal injuries: a review of the literature. J Occup Rehabil. 2018;28(1):16–27.
Cancelliere C, Donavan J, Stochkendahl MJ, Biscardi M, Ammendolia C, Myburgh C, Cassidy JD. Factors affecting return to work after injury or illness: best evidence synthesis of systematic reviews. Chiropr Man Therap. 2016. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12998-016-0113-z.
Chen YH, Hsu CY, Lien SH, Yu SJ, Chang JM, Su SW, Chao YH. Entry into vocational rehabilitation program following work-related hand injury: potential candidates. Int J Occup Med Environ Health. 2016; 29(1):101–111.
Reneman MF. Chapter 9: state of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation in chronic musculoskeletal pain complaints. In: Escorpizo R, Brage S, Homa D, Stucki G, editors. Handbook of vocational rehabilitation and disability evaluation: application and implementation of the ICF. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015. pp. 187–198.
Acknowledgements
This study is a part of a larger study and is performed in close collaboration with the ‘Centre of knowledge on work incapacity’ of the National Institute for Health and Disability Insurance (NIHDI) Belgium.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Ethical Approval
The study was approved by the Ethics Commission of the Ghent University Hospital and was granted the number B670201731223.
Informed Consent
Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Vermeulen, K., Woestyn, M., Oostra, K. et al. Cross-Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation of the Dutch Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire (WORQ-VL). J Occup Rehabil 29, 514–525 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9812-8
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10926-018-9812-8