Korean Version of the Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory among Construction Workers: Cultural Adaptation and Psychometric Evaluation

Abstract

The Swedish Occupational Fatigue Inventory (SOFI) has been tested in different languages and populations; thus, there is a need for a culturally adapted Korean version. We evaluated the psychometric properties of a Korean version of the SOFI among construction workers. The SOFI was translated into Korean and reviewed through a back-translation process involving standardized scaling procedures. Its reliability and validity were evaluated with a sample of 193 construction workers using internal consistency, item–subscale correlations, test–retest reliability, and content, construct, and concurrent validity. The Cronbach’s alpha coefficients of the total scale and each subscale were satisfactory. Item–subscale correlations and test–retest reliability were both at acceptable levels. Confirmatory factor analyses revealed that the five-factor model had acceptable model fits corresponding to the structure of the original instrument. However, some modifications were made to improve in the new context from model fit (such as χ2(95) = 113.905 (p = 0.091), CFI = 0.994, and RMSEA = 0.033, as well as the lowest AIC = 383.905). Correlation analysis showed a significant relationship of SOFI with other fatigue measures in terms of total and subscale scores. Occupational fatigue is one of the important risk factors associated with workers’ health and safety at work. The new translated instrument is a reliable and valid tool for assessing fatigue among Korean construction workers. However, this instrument should be tested extensively in other working populations to devise specific interventions concerning fatigue reduction.

Development of an integrated fatigue measurement system for construction workers: a feasibility study

“…The worker answers the second EMA question regarding the participant’s fatigue symptoms four times a day when (a) starting the work, (b) taking regular breaks, and (c) finishing the work (hereinafter referred to as EMA (type 2)). Five specific questions were extracted from the Korean version of the Swedish occupational fatigue inventory (K-SOFI) [ 16 ] to evaluate momentary occupational fatigue among construction workers. In this study, the fatigue level was measured on a 6-point Likert scale (0 = “not at all”, 5 = “severe fatigue”).…”

“…In this study, the fatigue level was measured on a 6-point Likert scale (0 = “not at all”, 5 = “severe fatigue”). Originally, the SOFI was on a 7-point Likert scale (0 = “not at all”, 6 = “very high level”) [ 9 ]; however, we revised it to a 6-point Likert scale based on the findings from interviews with construction site managers and several construction workers that high levels of fatigue were not frequent [ 16 ].…”

“…Although this approach provides real-time objective proxy data, it fails to capture subjective data. Thus, it is necessary to integrate both subjective and objective measures simultaneously to comprehensively capture real time data with respect to the natural environment [ 13 , 16 , 28 ].…”

Evaluation of a Fast Test Based on Biometric Signals to Assess Mental Fatigue at the Workplace—A Pilot Study

“…This type of fatigue is an occupational issue derived from work-related conditions, such as shift work [8], work schedule [9], and emotional distress [10]; it is further related to reduction of cognitive functions among workers, which can lead to a decrease in productivity [11]. This condition is subjective [12] and therefore, in order to properly assess it, multiple efforts have been made on translating self-assessment questionnaires [13] and harmonizing health and safety scales [14]. Alternatively, more modern, artificial intelligence (AI)-based proposals are capable of the following: improving safety in construction sites using internet of things (IoT) technology [15]; predicting injury outcomes and number of days away from work [16]; analyzing thermal protective and thermophysiological comfort performance of fabrics [17]; and protecting workers health, safety and well-being [18].…”

“I’m So Tired”: Fatigue as a Persistent Physical Symptom among Working People Experiencing Exhaustion Disorder

“…Fatigue is widespread in the general population [1][2][3], frequently presented in primary care [4][5][6] and increasingly reported by the working population [7][8][9]. Fatigue in the workforce has attracted renewed attention, as it likely influences workers' motivation, performance, sick leave and disability [10] in addition to general mortality [11] with accompanying personal, organisational and societal costs [12,13].…”