Reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work performance.

D E Lechner, J R Jackson, D L Roth, K V Straaton
{"title":"Reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work performance.","authors":"D E Lechner,&nbsp;J R Jackson,&nbsp;D L Roth,&nbsp;K V Straaton","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>This study examined the interrater reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work abilities, the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. Eleven physical therapists were trained to administer and score this evaluation. From this group, two therapists at a time simultaneously and independently evaluated 50 patients with musculoskeletal disorders as they performed the tasks of the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. At the conclusion of the evaluation, each therapist determined the safe level of physical work for each patient. A comparison of the two independent evaluations was used to determine reliability. To determine validity, the predicted level of work was compared with the actual level of work. Kappa coefficient between the two therapists on the level of work was .83. Spearman rho correlations between the predicted and actual levels of work ranged from .41 to .55. Only 14 to 18% were working above the level predicted by the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. These results indicate high interrater reliability. Given the lack of a perfect standard for validity comparisons, these results also provide evidence in support of convergent validity. The test can be used in making decisions regarding return to work after injury, preemployment placement, and vocational exploration.</p>","PeriodicalId":16617,"journal":{"name":"Journal of occupational medicine. : official publication of the Industrial Medical Association","volume":"36 9","pages":"997-1004"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1994-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of occupational medicine. : official publication of the Industrial Medical Association","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

This study examined the interrater reliability and validity of a newly developed test of physical work abilities, the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. Eleven physical therapists were trained to administer and score this evaluation. From this group, two therapists at a time simultaneously and independently evaluated 50 patients with musculoskeletal disorders as they performed the tasks of the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. At the conclusion of the evaluation, each therapist determined the safe level of physical work for each patient. A comparison of the two independent evaluations was used to determine reliability. To determine validity, the predicted level of work was compared with the actual level of work. Kappa coefficient between the two therapists on the level of work was .83. Spearman rho correlations between the predicted and actual levels of work ranged from .41 to .55. Only 14 to 18% were working above the level predicted by the Physical Work Performance Evaluation. These results indicate high interrater reliability. Given the lack of a perfect standard for validity comparisons, these results also provide evidence in support of convergent validity. The test can be used in making decisions regarding return to work after injury, preemployment placement, and vocational exploration.

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
新开发的体力劳动绩效测试的信度和效度。
本研究检验了一项新开发的体力工作能力测试——体力工作绩效评估的解释者信度和效度。11名物理治疗师接受了培训,以管理和评分这项评估。从这一组中,两名治疗师同时独立地评估了50名患有肌肉骨骼疾病的患者,因为他们执行了体力工作表现评估任务。在评估结束时,每位治疗师确定每位患者的安全体力劳动水平。两个独立评估的比较被用来确定可靠性。为了确定效度,将预测的工作水平与实际的工作水平进行比较。两治疗师在工作水平上的Kappa系数为0.83。预测工作水平和实际工作水平之间的Spearman rho相关性在0.41到0.55之间。只有14%到18%的人的工作水平高于体力工作绩效评估所预测的水平。这些结果表明了较高的互译可靠性。鉴于缺乏完善的效度比较标准,这些结果也为支持收敛效度提供了证据。该测试可用于制定有关工伤后重返工作岗位,就业前安置和职业探索的决策。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Re: B-scan ultrasonic measurement of the lumbar spine canal as a predictor of industrial low back pain complaints and extended work loss, by M Battié et al. Re: Successful treatment of life-threatening proprionitrile exposure with sodium nitrite/sodium thiosulfate followed by hyperbaric oxygen, by Scolnick et al. Elevated dioxin blood levels in British chemical workers. Surgical gloves and hypersensitivity to latex. Sleep and alertness in a 12-hour rotating shift work environment.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1