Development of the Return-to-Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) and Validation with Workers Suffering from a Common Mental Disorder or Musculoskeletal Disorder

Abstract

Introduction Common mental disorders (CMDs) and musculoskeletal disorders (MSDs) lead the list of causes for work absence in several countries. Current research is starting to look at workers on sick leave as a single population, regardless of the nature of the disease or accident. The purpose of this study is to report the validation of the Return to Work Obstacles and Self-Efficacy Scale (ROSES) for people with MSDs and CMDs, based on the disability paradigm. Methods From a prospective design, the ROSES' reliability and validity were investigated in a Canadian sample of workers on sick leave due to MSDs (n = 206) and CMDs (n = 157). Results Exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses revealed that 46 items spread out on 10 conceptual dimensions (e.g., Fears of a relapse, Job demands, Difficult relation with the immediate supervisor), with satisfactory alpha coefficients and test-retest reliability for all subscales. Finally, several dimensions of ROSES also predict the participant's RTW within 6 months for MSDs (e.g., job demands), and CMDs (e.g., difficult relation with the immediate supervisor), even when adjusted by several variables (e.g., age, severity of symptoms). Apart from the job demands dimension, when the ROSES dimension is more external to the individual, only the perception of obstacles remains significant to predict RTW whereas it is the opposite result when the dimension is more internal (e.g., fears of a relapse). Conclusion The ROSES demonstrated satisfactory results regarding its validity and reliability with people having MSDs or CMDs, at the time of the return-to-work process.

Determinants of Sickness Absence and Return to Work Among Employees with Common Mental Disorders: A Scoping Review

“…Addressing RTW-expectations in occupational healthcare services or vocational rehabilitation might be beneficial in early stages or even prior to a sick-leave episode [ 102 ]. Expectations for RTW [ 103 ] and self-efficacy [ 104 ] can be measured with a questionnaire, although the former needs further validation in a CMD population.…”

Do work- and home-related demands and resources differ between women and men during return-to-work? A focus group study among employees with common mental disorders

“…The reviews did not find or mention factors related to the home, which may reflect that they are generally less studied in relation to RTW than work-related factors [20]. Furthermore, most studies that have considered both work-and home-related aspects have focused on predicting CMDrelated sick leave, and fewer have considered their influence on RTW [21]. Finally, most studies that include home-related aspects focus on women and only a few compare women with men.…”

A Systematic Search and Review of Questionnaires Measuring Individual psychosocial Factors Predicting Return to Work After Musculoskeletal and Common Mental Disorders

“…The Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale [38,39] failed to meet only one psychometric criterion (i.e., test-retest reliability) and one practical criterion (i.e., length; it consists of ten items). The Return-to-work Self-Efficacy Questionnaire [40][41][42][43][44][45] and the Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale-19 [46] met all the psychometric criteria but did not meet two practical criteria (i.e., length and final score computation-some 47] did not meet one psychometric (i.e., convergent validity) and two practical criteria (i.e., length-46 items, and final score computation). The length of ROSES is due, not only to the inclusion of two concepts at the same time (i.e., barriers to return to work and self-efficacy to overcome these RTW barriers), but also to the inclusion of 10 conceptual subscales (e.g., job demands).…”