“蓝旗”，一份关于工作相关社会心理风险因素的简短临床问卷的编制——一项初级保健中的验证研究

"Blue flags", development of a short clinical questionnaire on work-related psychosocial risk factors - a validation study in primary care.

作者信息

Post Sennehed Charlotte, Gard Gunvor, Holmberg Sara, Stigmar Kjerstin, Forsbrand Malin, Grahn Birgitta

机构信息

Department of Clinical Sciences Lund, Lund University, Orthopedics, Lund, Sweden.

Epidemiology and Register Centre South, Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden.

出版信息

BMC Musculoskelet Disord. 2017 Jul 24;18(1):318. doi: 10.1186/s12891-017-1677-z.

DOI:10.1186/s12891-017-1677-z

PMID:28738803

原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5525291/

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Working conditions substantially influence health, work ability and sick leave. Useful instruments to help clinicians pay attention to working conditions are lacking in primary care (PC). The aim of this study was to test the validity of a short "Blue flags" questionnaire, which focuses on work-related psychosocial risk factors and any potential need for contacts and/or actions at the workplace.

METHODS

From the original"The General Nordic Questionnaire" (QPS) the research group identified five content areas with a total of 51 items which were considered to be most relevant focusing on work-related psychosocial risk factors. Fourteen items were selected from the identified QPS content areas and organised in a short questionnaire "Blue flags". These 14 items were validated towards the 51 QPS items. Content validity was reviewed by a professional panel and a patient panel. Structural and concurrent validity were also tested within a randomised clinical trial.

RESULTS

The two panels (n = 111) considered the 14 psychosocial items to be relevant. A four-factor model was extracted with an explained variance of 25.2%, 14.9%, 10.9% and 8.3% respectively. All 14 items showed satisfactory loadings on all factors. Concerning concurrent validity the overall correlation was very strong r = 0.87 (p < 0.001).). Correlations were moderately strong for factor one, r = 0.62 (p < 0.001) and factor two, r = 0.74 (p < 0.001). Factor three and factor four were weaker, bur still fair and significant at r = 0.53 (p < 0.001) and r = 0.41 (p < 0.001) respectively. The internal consistency of the whole "Blue flags" was good with Cronbach's alpha of 0.76.

CONCLUSIONS

The content, structural and concurrent validity were satisfactory in this first step of development of the "Blue flags" questionnaire. In summary, the overall validity is considered acceptable. Testing in clinical contexts and in other patient populations is recommended to ensure predictive validity and usefulness.

摘要

背景

工作条件对健康、工作能力和病假有重大影响。基层医疗（PC）中缺乏有助于临床医生关注工作条件的实用工具。本研究的目的是测试一份简短的“蓝旗”问卷的有效性，该问卷侧重于与工作相关的社会心理风险因素以及工作场所接触和/或行动的任何潜在需求。

方法

研究小组从原始的“北欧通用问卷”（QPS）中确定了五个内容领域，共51个项目，这些项目被认为与关注工作相关的社会心理风险因素最为相关。从确定的QPS内容领域中选择了14个项目，并组织成一份简短的问卷“蓝旗”。这14个项目针对51个QPS项目进行了验证。专业小组和患者小组对内容效度进行了审查。结构效度和同时效度也在一项随机临床试验中进行了测试。

结果

两个小组（n = 111）认为这14个社会心理项目是相关的。提取了一个四因素模型，解释方差分别为25.2%、14.9%、10.9%和8.3%。所有14个项目在所有因素上都显示出令人满意的载荷。关于同时效度，总体相关性非常强，r = 0.87（p < 0.001）。因素一的相关性中等强度，r = 0.62（p < 0.001），因素二的相关性为r = 0.74（p < 0.001）。因素三和因素四的相关性较弱，但仍然合理且显著，分别为r = 0.53（p < 0.001）和r = 0.41（p < 0.001）。整个“蓝旗”问卷的内部一致性良好，Cronbach's alpha为0.76。