Psychometric properties of the Need for Recovery after work scale: test-retest reliability and sensitivity to detect change

E M de Croon, J K Sluiter, M H W Frings-Dresen, E M de Croon, J K Sluiter, M H W Frings-Dresen

Abstract

Background: Monitoring worker health and evaluating occupational healthcare interventions requires sensitive instruments that are reliable over time. The Need for Recovery scale (NFR), which quantifies workers' difficulties in recovering from work related exertions, may be a relevant instrument in this respect.

Objectives: To examine (1) the NFR's test-retest reliability and (2) the NFR's sensitivity to detect the effect of a fatigue inducing change, namely an increase in working hours.

Methods: Two year longitudinal data of 526 truck drivers and 144 nurses were used. Two week, one year, and two year test-retest reliability was examined in both stable and unstable work environments by calculating intraclass correlations (ICCs). Work environmental (in)stability was quantified by four events that might have occurred during the follow up period: (1) a reorganisation or merge (0 = yes, 1 = no), (2) a change of supervisor or management (0 = yes, 1 = no), (3) a change in working hours or work schedules (0 = yes, 1 = no), and (4) a change in work activities, position, or duties (0 = yes, 1 = no). The four scores constituted a work (in)stability index ranging from 0 to 4. The NFR's sensitivity to detect the effect of the increase in working hours was assessed indirectly by comparing it with an alternative scale, namely the Checklist Individual Strength.

Results: Test-retest reliability over a two year interval was good to excellent when applied in stable work environments (ICCs 0.68 to 0.80) but, as expected, poor to fair when applied in unstable work environments (ICCs 0.30 to 0.55). The NFR was sensitive in detecting an increase in work related fatigue due to the increase in working hours (effect size 0.40).

Conclusions: The NFR's test-retest reliability and sensitivity to detect change are favourable. This implicates that the NFR may form a valuable part of health surveys and may be a useful tool for evaluating occupational healthcare interventions.

References

    1. Frankenhaeuser M, Lundberg U, Fredrikson al Stress on and of the job as related to sex and occupational status in white‐collar workers. J Organ Behav 198910321–346.
    1. Meijman T F, Mulder G, Van Dormolen al Workload of driving examiners: a psychophysiological field study. In: Kragt H, ed. Enhancing industrial performance. London: Taylor & Francis, 1992245–258.
    1. Jansen N W H, Kant I J, van Amelsvoort L G P al Need for recovery from work: evaluating short‐term effects of working hours, patterns and schedules. Ergonomics 200346664–680.
    1. Sluiter J K, De Croon E M, Meijman T al Need for recovery from work related fatigue and its role in the development and prediction of subjective health complaints. Occup Environ Med 20036062i–70i.
    1. Westman M, Eden D. Effects of a respite from work on burnout: vacation relief and fade‐out. J Appl Psychol 199782516–527.
    1. Sluiter J K, Van der Beek A J, Frings‐Dresen M H W. The influence of work characteristics on the need for recovery and experienced health: a study on coach drivers. Ergonomics 199942573–583.
    1. Sihm I, Delholm G, Hansen E al The psychosocial work environment of younger men surviving acute myocardial infarction. Europ Heart J 199112203–209.
    1. Bergqvist U, Wolgast E, Nilsson al Musculoskeletal disorders among visual display terminal workers: individual, and work organizational factors. Ergonomics 199538763–776.
    1. Kuiper J I, Van der Beek A J, Meijman T F. Psychosomatic complaints and unwinding of sympathoadrenal activation after work. Stress Med 1998147–12.
    1. Magnavita N, Bevilacqua L, Mirk al Work‐related musculoskeletal complaints in sonologists. J Occup Environ Med 199941981–988.
    1. Van Amelsvoort L G P M, Kant I J, Bültmann al Need for recovery after work and the subsequent risk of cardiovascular disease in a working population. Occup Environ Med 20036083–87.
    1. Sonnentag S. Work, recovery activities, and individual well‐being: a diary study. J Occup Health Psychol 20016196–210.
    1. Sluiter J K, Frings‐Dresen M H W, Van der Beek A al The relation between work‐induced neuroendocrine reactivity and recovery, subjective need for recovery, and health status. J Psychosom Res 20015029–37.
    1. Van Veldhoven M J P M, Meijman T F. Het meten van psychosociale arbeidsbelasing met een vragenlijst: de Vragenlijst Beleving en Beoordeling van de Arbeid (VBBA)[Questionnaire on psychosocial job demands and job stress]. Amsterdam: NIA, 1994
    1. Alexopoulos E C, Burdorf A, Kalokerinou A. Risk factors for musculoskeletal disorders among nursing personnel in Greek hospitals. Int Arch Occup Environ Health 200376289–294.
    1. Van Amelsvoort L G P M, Kant I J, Bültmann al Need for recovery after work and the subsequent risk of cardiovascular disease in a working population. Occup Environ Med 20036083i–7i.
    1. Van Amelsvoort L G P M, Janssen N, Swaen al Direction of shift rotation in three‐shift workers in relation to psychological health and work‐family conflict. Scand J Work Environ Health 200430149–159.
    1. Bekker M H J, Nijssen A, Hens G. Stress prevention training: sex differences in types of stressors, coping, and training effects. Stress Health 200117207–218.
    1. Swaen G M H, van Amelsvoort L G P M, Bültmann al Fatigue as a risk factor for being injured in an occupational accident: results from the Maastricht Cohort Study. Occup Environ Med 20036088–92.
    1. De Vries J, Michielsen H J, Van Heck G L. Assessment of fatigue among working people: a comparison of six questionnaires. Occup Environ Med 20036010i–5i.
    1. Van Veldhoven M J P M, Broersen J P J. Measurement quality and validity of the “need for recovery scale”. Occup Environ Med 2003603i–9i.
    1. Sparks K, Cooper C, Fried al The effects of hours of work on health: a meta‐analytic review. J Occup Organ Psychol 199770391–408.
    1. Harrington J M. Health effects of shift work and extended hours of work. Occup Environ Med 20015868–72.
    1. Van der Hulst M. Long workhours and health. Scand J Work Environ Health 200329171–188.
    1. Horne J, Reyner L. Vehicle accidents related to sleep: a review. Occup Environ Med 199956289–294.
    1. Vercoulen J H M M, Swanink C M A, Fennis J F al Dimensional assessment of chronic fatigue syndrome. J Psychosom Res 199438383–392.
    1. Beurskens A J H M, Bültmann U, Kant I al Fatigue among working people: validity of a questionnaire measure. Occup Environ Med 200057353–357.
    1. Vercoulen J H M M, Swanink C M, Zitman F al Randomised, double‐blind, placebo‐controlled study of fluoxetine in chronic fatigue syndrome. Lancet 1996347858–861.
    1. Bültmann U, De Vries M, Beurskens A al Measurement of prolonged fatigue in the working population: determination of a cutoff point for the Checklist Individual Strength. J Occup Health Psychol 20005411–416.
    1. Streiner D L, Norman G R. Health Measurement Scales. Oxford: OUP, 2003
    1. Vercoulen J H M M, Swanink C M, Fennis J F al Prognosis in chronic fatigue syndrome: a prospective study on the natural course. J Neurol Neurosur Psychiatry 199660489–494.
    1. McGraw K O, Wong S P. Forming inferences about some intraclass correlation coefficients. Psychol Methods 1996130–46.
    1. Cicchetti D V. Guidelines, criteria and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assessment 19946284–290.
    1. Kane R L. Outcome measures. In: Kane RL, ed. Understanding health care outcomes research. Aspen: Gaithersberg, MD, 199717–18.
    1. Murphy K R, Davidshofer C O. Reliability: the consistency of test scores. In: Murphy KR, Davidshofer CO, eds. Psychological testing principles and applications. New Jersey: Prentice‐Hall, Inc, 1994
    1. Cortina J M. What is coefficient alpha—an examination of theory and applications. J Appl Psychol 19937898–104.
    1. Spurgeon A, Harrington J M, Cooper C L. Health and safety problems associated with long working hours: a review of the current position. Occup Environ Med 199754367–375.
    1. Van der Beek A J, Frings‐Dresen M H W, Van Dijk F J al Loading and unloading by lorry drivers and musculoskeletal complaints. Int J Ind Ergon 19931213–23.

Source: PubMed

赞助者和合作者

医疗条件

药物干预

3
订阅