Determination of Perceived Levels of Physical Work Demand Thresholds, and Reliability and Responsiveness of the Modified-Spinal Function Sort Questionnaire in a Multidisciplinary Occupational Rehabilitation Setting.

Details

Ressource 1Request a copy Under indefinite embargo.
UNIL restricted access
State: Public
Version: author
License: Not specified
Serval ID
serval:BIB_172565E01E27
Type
Article: article from journal or magazin.
Collection
Publications
Institution
Title
Determination of Perceived Levels of Physical Work Demand Thresholds, and Reliability and Responsiveness of the Modified-Spinal Function Sort Questionnaire in a Multidisciplinary Occupational Rehabilitation Setting.
Journal
Journal of occupational rehabilitation
Author(s)
Burrus C., Vuistiner P., Léger B., Luthi F.
ISSN
1573-3688 (Electronic)
ISSN-L
1053-0487
Publication state
Published
Issued date
12/2021
Peer-reviewed
Oui
Volume
31
Number
4
Pages
822-830
Language
english
Notes
Publication types: Journal Article
Publication Status: ppublish
Abstract
To determine the levels of perceived work demand capacity corresponding to the Modified Spinal Function Sort (M-SFS) score and precise reliability validity and responsiveness.
This prospective validation study included patients with chronic musculoskeletal impairments who underwent multidisciplinary occupational rehabilitation. After determining the percentiles of the work demand thresholds corresponding to the spinal function sort (SFS), the percentiles were transposed to the M-SFS. Reliability was assessed using the intraclass correlation coefficient and limits of agreement. Correlations with other questionnaires and a lifting task were measured to assess validity. Responsiveness was determined using anchor- and distribution-based approaches.
288 patients were included. The following thresholds were obtained for the M-SFS: 0-43 points, minimal; 44-50, very light; 51-58, light; 59-64, light to medium; 65-70, medium; 71-76, heavy; and 77-80, very heavy. Reliability was confirmed. The correlation between the M-SFS and SFS scores was good at 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86-0.91) and moderate according to the PILE-test result of 0.60 (95% CI, 0.50-0.67). We could not calculate a valid anchor-based minimal clinically important difference. The standard error of measurement was 3.9 points, and the smallest detectable change was 10.8 points.
On the basis of the comparison of the M-SFS and SFS scores, the M-SFS score can be interpreted in relation to the levels of work demand. This study confirms the good reliability and validity of the M-SFS questionnaire in assessing perceived physical capacity. Further studies are needed to determine its responsiveness.
Keywords
Humans, Prospective Studies, Reproducibility of Results, Spine, Surveys and Questionnaires, Multidisciplinary occupational rehabilitation, Questionnaire, Self-efficacy
Pubmed
Web of science
Create date
30/03/2021 8:00
Last modification date
25/07/2024 5:56
Usage data