Reliability of a Questionnaire and an Ergonomic Checklist for Assessing Working Conditions and Health at Call Centres

• Autorzy: Norman K. , Alm H. , Tornqvist E. W. , Toomingas A.
• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

Background. The purpose was to study the test-retest reliability and internal consistency of questions in a questionnaire concerning working conditions and health and the inter-rater reliability of observations and measurements according to an ergonomic checklist. Method. Fifty-seven operators participated in a retest questionnaire and 58 operators participated in an inter-observer test. Results. The questions had fair to good or higher reliability in 142 of the total of 312. Twenty-seven of the total of 44 variables in the ergonomic checklist were classified as having fair to good or higher reliability. Conclusions. About half of the questions had fair to good or higher reliability and can be recommended for further analyses. The majority of variables in the ergonomic checklist were classified as having fair to good or higher reliability. Low reliability does not necessarily indicate that the reliability of the test, per se, is low but may signify that the conditions measured vary over time or that the answers are aggregated in one part of the scale.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

test-retest reliability; inter-observer test; questionnaire; ergonomic checklist; call centre; computer work

PL

ergonomia; warunki pracy; praca a choroby; centra telefoniczne; praca przy komputerze; kwestionariusz

• Wydawca: Taylor & Francis
• Czasopismo: International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics
• Rocznik: 2006
• Tom: Vol. 12, No. 1
• Strony: 53--68
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 22 poz., tab.

Twórcy

autor

Norman K.

• Department for Work and Health, National Institute for Working Life, Stockholm, Sweden

autor

Alm H.

• Lulea University of Technology, Lulea, Sweden

autor

Tornqvist E. W.

• Department for Work and Health, National Institute for Working Life, Stockholm, Sweden
• Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institute, Sweden

autor

Toomingas A.

• Department for Work and Health, National Institute for Working Life, Stockholm, Sweden
• Department of Public Health Sciences, Karolinska Institute, Sweden

Bibliografia

• 1.Fleiss JL. The design and analysis of clinical experiments. New York, NY, USA: Wiley; 1986.
• 2.Dzissah JS, Karwowski W, Rieger J, Stewart D. Measurement of management efforts with respect to integration of quality, safety, and ergonomics issues in manufacturing industry. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing. 2005;15(2):213–32.
• 3.Kerlinger FN, Lee HW. (2000). Foundations of behavioural research. 4th ed. Fort Worth, TX, USA: Harcourt College; 2000.
• 4.Bland JM, Altman DG. Statistic notes: Cronbach’s alpha. BMJ. 1997;314:572.
• 5.Norman K, Nilsson T, Hagberg M, Wigaeus Tornqvist E, Hagman M, et al. Working conditions and health among female and male employees at one call centre in Sweden. Am Jour Ind Med. 2004; 46(1):55–62.
• 6.Tengblad P, Wiberg A, Herrman L, Backström M. Hållbart arbete i informationssamhället; Call Centre i utveckling (Report No. VR 2002:7). Stockholm, Sweden: Vinnova; 2002.
• 7.Currier DP. Elements of research in physical therapy. 2nd ed. London, UK: Williams & Wilkins; 1984.
• 8.Fleiss JL. Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2nd ed. New York, NY, USA: Wiley; 1981.
• 9.Maclure M, Willett W. Misinterpretation and misuse of the Kappa statistic. Am J Epidemiol. 1987;126(2):161–9.
• 10.SPSS base system user’s guide. Chicago, IL, USA: SPSS; 1990.
• 11.Wikman A. Developing social indicators—a survey method illustrated with examples of the working environment [doctoral dissertation]. Stockholm University: Stockholm Statistics Urval; 1991. In Swedish.
• 12.Wictorin C, Karlqvist L, Winkel J. Validity of self-reported exposures to work postures and manual handling. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1993;19:208–14.
• 13.Franzblau A, Salerno DF, Armstrong TJ, Werner RA. Test-retest reliability of an upper-extremity discomfort questionnaire in an industrial population. Scand J Work Environ Health. 1997;23(4):299–307.
• 14.Leijon O, Wiktorin C, Härenstam A, Karlqvist L, MOA Research Group. Validity of a self-administrated questionnaire for assessing physical work loads in a general population. J Occup Environ Med. 2002;44(8):724–35.
• 15.Salerno DF, Franzblau A, Armstrong TJ, Werner RA, Becker MP. Test-retest reliability of the upper extremity questionnaire among keyboard operators. Am J Ind Med. 2001;40(6):655–66.
• 16.Booth-Jones AD, Lemasters GK, Succop P, Atterbury MR, Bhattacharya A. Reliability of questionnaire information measuring musculoskeletal symptoms and work histories. Am Ind Hyg Assoc J. 1998;59(1):20–4.
• 17.Balogh I, Orbaek P, Winkel J, Nordander C, Ohlsson K, Ektor-Andersen J. Questionnairebased mechanical exposure indices for large population studies—reliability, internal consistency and predictive validity. Scand J Work Environ Health. 2001;27(1):41–8.
• 18.Stavem K, Foss T, Botnmark O, Andersen OK, Erikssen J. Inter-observer agreement in audit of quality of radiology request and reports. Clin Radiol. 2004;59(11):1018–24.
• 19.Sagaram S, Walji M, Meric-Bernstam F, Johnson C, Bernstam E. Inter-observer agreement for quality measures applied to online health information. MedInfo. 2004;11(Pt. 2):1308–12.
• 20. Barroso M, Wilson JR. HEDOMS—Human error and disturbance occurrence in manufacturing systems: toward the development of an analytical framework. Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing. 1999;9(1):87–104.
• 21.Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill; 1978.
• 22.Nunnally JC. Educational measurement and evaluation. New York, NY, USA: McGraw-Hill; 1964.