RESUMEN
The Certified Nursing Assistant (CNA) is an important part of the workforce in hospitals and nursing homes, whose work includes heavy and repetitive work tasks including patient manual handling. The Structured Multidisciplinary work Evaluation Tool (SMET) questionnaire is an Occupational Health Service method for evaluation of the work environment. The aim of this study is to compare the SMET questionnaire with technical measurements of physical workload in CNAs in a medical ward setting. 16 CNA's participated voluntarily to 8 h of measurements during one workday. Physical workload was measured with surface electromyography and inclinometers, and the work environment was evaluated with the SMET questionnaire during the same working day. Spearman's rho was used in the statistical correlation analysis between measurements. This study shows strong, statistically significant correlations between the items in the SMET questionnaire and measured physical workload, n CNAs.
Asunto(s)
Asistentes de Enfermería , Carga de Trabajo , Hospitales , Humanos , Casas de Salud , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Occupational health services (OHS) are rarely involved in preventive issues and systematic work environment management. The Structured Multidisciplinary Work Evaluation Tool (SMET) questionnaire was created to address the lack of multidisciplinary/multifactorial OHS tools with the aim to be used in preventive issues and systematic work environment management. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate trustworthiness of the inter-rater reliability in the qualitative analysis of the open-ended items and intra-rater reliability of the self-estimated items in the SMET questionnaire. METHODS: A qualitative comparison of the inter-rater reliability in the qualitative analysis of the open-ended items was performed to evaluate trustworthiness. The intra-rater reliability of the self-estimated items in the SMET questionnaire were analysed with Elisabet Svensson method. RESULTS: Qualitative analysis of the open-ended items showed good trustworthiness. The self-estimated items showed a high percent agreement (PA), 0.98-0.99 in the physically, 0.99 in the environmentally and 0.98-1.0 in the psychosocially demanding items. A low degree of systematic errors and individual variability were found. CONCLUSIONS: The SMET questionnaire shows good trustworthiness and intra-rater reliability and can be used to follow up and evaluate work environmental interventions.
Asunto(s)
Psicometría/normas , Lugar de Trabajo/normas , Adulto , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Psicometría/instrumentación , Psicometría/métodos , Investigación Cualitativa , Reproducibilidad de los Resultados , Encuestas y Cuestionarios , Lugar de Trabajo/psicologíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Important success factors for the Occupational Health Service (OHS) include services being based on active participation and risk identification from a multidisciplinary/multifactorial perspective. Despite an extensive search, no questionnaire with this approach was found so a new questionnaire was developed at the OHS. The aim of this study was to develop and validate the new questionnaire named Structured Multidisciplinary work Evaluation Tool (SMET) through action research. METHOD: Communicative and pragmatic validity were tested through the development of the questionnaire using action theory and presented in a descriptive portrayal. The Content Validity Index (CVI) was used to test content validity for each item as well as for the questionnaire as a whole. RESULT: Communicative and pragmatic validity were developed and tested over time in four different periods between 2008 and 2014, in 24 clinics (with a total of approximately 1000 employees) in Region Jönköping County.The content validity of the SMET questionnaire as a whole was close to excellent and the validity of the questions regarding physically and psychosocially demanding work factors were found to be excellent. The questions regarding environmentally demanding work factors were found to have a lower, but still good, validity. CONCLUSION: The SMET questionnaire has very good content validity. The pervasive work with the SMET questionnaire also shows good pragmatic and communicative validity.