Reliability of a questionnaire and an ergonomic checklist for assessing working conditions and health at call centres.
ABSTRACT 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.
Fifty-seven operators participated in a retest questionnaire and 58 operators participated in an inter-observer test.
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.
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.
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: The main objective of this study was to identify critical factors that measure management efforts with regard to quality, safety, and ergonomics issues for their simultaneous improvement. Eleven identified management activity areas have been synthesized from the literature as the most important areas that meet all stakeholders' needs. Factors were then developed to measure the efficiency of these activities through a questionnaire. The overall response rate of the survey questionnaire was 47%. The reliability coefficients ranging from 0.73 to 0.85 indicated that some scales or management activity areas are more reliable in measuring potential for improvements in terms of quality, ergonomics, safety, and efficiency. The proposed instrument for quantifying management efforts with respect to simultaneous improvements in the areas of quality, ergonomics, and safety was found to be valid and reliable. © 2005 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. Hum Factors Man 15: 213–232, 2005.Human Factors and Ergonomics in Manufacturing 02/2005; 15(2):213 - 232. · 0.62 Impact Factor
- American Journal of Epidemiology 12/1988; 128(5):1179-81. · 4.78 Impact Factor
- [show abstract] [hide abstract]
ABSTRACT: Efforts to understand or to monitor upper-extremity musculoskeletal disorders among workers have usually involved the use of questionnaires. The goal of this study was to assess the test-retest reliability of an upper-extremity discomfort questionnaire among industrial workers. Test-retest agreement among 148 workers was analyzed using the kappa coefficient for categorical outcomes. Values of kappa greater than 0.75 are considered excellent, values between 0.40 and 0.75 are fair to good, and values of less than 0.40 represent poor agreement beyond chance alone. Test-retest results of continuous measures (eg, visual analogue scale responses) were compared with paired t-tests. The test-retest reliability of the questionnaire used to elicit demographic information, medical history, exercise participation, and information on musculoskeletal symptoms among industrial workers appears to be good to excellent in most instances. These results suggest that most results of this discomfort questionnaire are reliable and suitable for use in epidemiologic studies. For reassurance of the robustness of these findings, similar studies should be carried out in other worker populations with this, and other, questionnaire instruments.Scandinavian journal of work, environment & health 09/1997; 23(4):299-307. · 3.78 Impact Factor