Innes Ev, Straker Leon
School of Occupation & Leisure Sciences, Faculty of Health Sciences, The University of Sydney, Lidcombe, NSW, Australia.
Work. 2003;20(1):63-76.
In order for clinicians to select and conduct work-related assessments that demonstrate 'best practice', it is necessary to identify assessments that are considered 'excellent'.
The aims of this study were to determine (1) the attributes associated with excellence for each of 3 types of work-related assessment (WPAs, FCEJs & FCENJs), and (2) the differences between the attributes associated with each type of work-related assessment.
A questionnaire was sent to all accredited occupational or vocational rehabilitation providers in Australia, targeting occupational therapists and physiotherapists who conducted work-related assessments. The response rate was 25.3%, and 132 questionnaires were analysed.
A MANOVA revealed that the perceived importance of 18 attributes was different between the 3 forms of work-related assessment F36, 364=6.54; p<0.001). There was a core of 7 attributes that showed no difference between assessments (accurate, comprehensive, credible, flexible, practical, safe and useful). Two attributes (generalisable and specific) were different for all 3 forms of assessment. A large group of attributes (consistent, measurable, objective, reliable, reproducible, standardised, structured and valid) demonstrated significant differences between WPAs and both forms of FCE. Relevant demonstrated significant differences between FCENJs and both WPAs and FCEJs. Reliability analysis revealed 2 constructs (dependability and utility).
This study demonstrated that there were significant differences between 3 forms of work-related assessments (WPAs, FCEJs & FCENJs) in terms of the attributes considered necessary for excellence for each form of assessment. The attributes were considered to relate to either qualitative or quantitative features of assessment. These features were reflected in the constructs utility, which was comprised of qualitative attributes and associated with broad concepts of validity, and dependability, which was comprised of quantitative attributes and reflected concepts of reliability. There appeared to be a continuum of work-related assessment that ranged from WPAs demonstrating the most qualitative attributes to FCENJs demonstrating the most quantitative features.
为了让临床医生能够选择并开展能展现“最佳实践”的与工作相关的评估，有必要识别出被认为是“优秀”的评估。
本研究的目的是确定（1）三种与工作相关的评估（工作能力评估、就业前综合评估及就业前医学评估）中每种评估的优秀相关属性，以及（2）每种与工作相关的评估的相关属性之间的差异。
向澳大利亚所有经认可的职业或职业康复服务提供商发放问卷，目标是从事与工作相关评估的职业治疗师和物理治疗师。回复率为25.3%，共分析了132份问卷。
多变量方差分析显示，三种与工作相关的评估形式之间，18个属性的感知重要性存在差异（F36, 364 = 6.54；p < 0.001）。有7个核心属性在评估之间没有差异（准确、全面、可信、灵活、实用、安全和有用）。有两个属性（可推广和特定）在所有三种评估形式中都不同。一大组属性（一致、可测量、客观、可靠、可重复、标准化、结构化和有效）在工作能力评估与两种就业前综合评估形式之间显示出显著差异。相关在就业前医学评估与工作能力评估和就业前综合评估之间显示出显著差异。可靠性分析揭示了两个结构（可靠性和实用性）。
本研究表明，三种与工作相关的评估（工作能力评估、就业前综合评估及就业前医学评估）在每种评估形式优秀所需的属性方面存在显著差异。这些属性被认为与评估的定性或定量特征相关。这些特征反映在结构实用性中，实用性由定性属性组成并与广泛的效度概念相关，以及可靠性中，可靠性由定量属性组成并反映可靠性概念。与工作相关的评估似乎存在一个连续体，从具有最多定性属性的工作能力评估到具有最多定量特征的就业前医学评估。
