Measurement Properties of the Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale in Workers with Shoulder Injuries

Abstract

Purpose: The objective of this study was to investigate the measurement properties of the Return-To-Work Self-Efficacy (RTWSE) scale in injured Canadian workers. Method: We assessed internal consistency, construct-convergent, and known-groups validity of the RTWSE scale's total score and the pain management and re-injury self-efficacy (PRSE), supervisor support self-efficacy (SSE), and coworkers support self-efficacy (CWSE) domains in workers who had participated in a multidisciplinary rehabilitation program. Disability was measured by using the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand (DASH) scale. Spearman's r, odds ratios, and the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (AUC) were used to examine the strength of the associations. Results: The data of 57 injured workers (43 men [75%], mean age 52 [11] y) were used for analysis. Internal consistency of the domains was satisfactory, with Cronbach's as of 0.81, 0.87, and 0.92 for the CWSE, PRSE, and SSE, respectively. The PRSE domain correlated with the DASH (r = 0.39) and relevant domains of the RTWSE scale (rs = 0.47-0.78). The PRSE was able to differentiate between working and non-working people (AUC = 0.72). Satisfaction with the actual support received at work and overall job satisfaction correlated significantly with the total score and CWSE and SSE domains (AUCs 0.70). Conclusions: The RTWSE showed satisfactory internal consistency and construct convergent and known-groups validity in workers with shoulder injuries.

Transcultural validation of the return-to-work self-efficacy scale in Korean patients with work-related injuries

“…The three factors with 17 items were identified: (i) meeting job demands, (ii) modifying job tasks, and (iii) communicating needs to others. All of the items (except two which were removed) were classified into the same constructs as in the original RTWSE-19 [13]. The two excluded items (suggesting changes to supervisor and avoiding re-injury) were removed due to low factor loading, though both were originally included in the modifying job tasks subscale.…”

“…In initial studies on RTW, measurements of general self-efficacy or self-efficacy for managing pain were mainly used, and there were conflicting findings on the impact of self-efficacy in RTW, as no self-efficacy measurement specific to RTW existed [10]. Since 2010, RTWSE scales specific to resuming work after the onset of a work-related injury have been developed and validated, especially for injured workers with musculoskeletal injuries [10][11][12][13][14], mental illness [15,16], and psychological injuries [17,18]. RTWSE-19, based on qualitative research findings by Shaw and colleagues [9,14], is a self-report questionnaire assessing workers' confidence in their RTW abilities.…”

Transcultural validation of the Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale in Korean patients with work-related injuries Transcultural Validation of the Return-to-Work Self-Efficacy Scale in Korean patients with work-related injuries

“…In initial studies on RTW, measurements of general self-efficacy or self-efficacy for managing pain were mainly used, and there were conflicting findings on the impact of self-efficacy in RTW, as no selfefficacy measurement specific to RTW existed 10 . Since 2010, RTWSE scales specific to resuming work after the onset of a work-related injury have been developed and validated, especially for injured workers with musculoskeletal injuries [10][11][12][13][14] , mental illness 15,16 , and psychological injuries 17,18 . RTWSE-19, based on qualitative research findings by Shaw and colleagues 9,14 , is a self-report questionnaire assessing workers' confidence in their RTW abilities.…”