Skip to main content
Mijn bibliotheek
Shop
Nieuws Boeken Tijdschriften Toetsvragen Web-tv Video Audio
Tips voor Mijn BSL
Inloggen

Welkom bij THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie & Bohn Stafleu van Loghum

THIM Hogeschool voor Fysiotherapie heeft ervoor gezorgd dat je Mijn BSL eenvoudig en snel kunt raadplegen. Je kunt je links eenvoudig registreren. Met deze gegevens kun je thuis, of waar ook ter wereld toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL. Heb je een vraag, neem dan contact op met helpdesk@thim.nl.

» Andere revante producten voor THIM studenten en medewerkers.

Registreer

Om ook buiten de locaties van THIM, thuis bijvoorbeeld, van Mijn BSL gebruik te kunnen maken, moet je jezelf eenmalig registreren. Dit kan alleen vanaf een computer op een van de locaties van THIM.

Eenmaal geregistreerd kun je thuis of waar ook ter wereld onbeperkt toegang krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Login

Als u al geregistreerd bent, hoeft u alleen maar in te loggen om onbeperkt toegang te krijgen tot Mijn BSL.

Inloggen
Top
Quality of Life Research
Gepubliceerd in:

01-03-2014

Measurement properties of the Work Limitations Questionnaire were sufficient among cancer survivors

Auteurs: Sietske J. Tamminga, Jos H. A. M. Verbeek, Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen, Angela G. E. M. De Boer

Gepubliceerd in: Quality of Life Research | Uitgave 2/2014

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail
    Link delen
publish
Publiceer nu

Abstract

Purpose

The purpose of this study was to determine reproducibility, validity, and responsiveness of the Work Limitations Questionnaire (WLQ) among cancer survivors.

Methods

A cohort of 53 cancer survivors completed the WLQ and other questionnaires at baseline, 4-week, and 6-month follow-up. We assessed internal consistency, intraclass correlation coefficient, standard error of measurement, floor- and ceiling effects and compared the WLQ with other constructs. For responsiveness, we assessed the following anchor-based measures: minimal important change (MIC) versus smallest detectable change (SDC) and area under the curve (AUC) of receiver operation characteristic (ROC).

Results

We found sufficient reproducibility at group level but not at individual level as the MIC (4.0) exceeded SDC at group level (3.1) but not at individual level (18.0). There was no indication of systematic bias or proportional bias. The internal consistency and construct validity for the WLQ and its subscales were sufficient or slightly less than sufficient. There was a floor effect for one subscale, but there were no ceiling effects. Responsiveness was sufficient with an AUC of a ROC of 0.65.

Conclusions

The WLQ is reproducible, valid, and responsive for use at group level among cancer survivors but not sufficiently reproducible for use at individual level.
vorige artikel Use of factor analysis models to evaluate measurement invariance property of the Asthma Control Questionnaire (ACQ)
volgende artikel Validation of the Polish version of the EORTC QLQ-BM22 module for the assessment of health-related quality of life in patients with bone metastases
Literatuur
1.
De Boer, A., Taskila, T., Ojajärvi, A., van Dijk, F., & Verbeek, J. (2009). Cancer survivors and unemployment—A meta-analysis and meta-regression. Journal of the American Medical Association, 301(7), 753–762.PubMedCrossRef
2.
Spelten, E. R., Sprangers, M. A. G., & Verbeek, J. H. A. M. (2002). Factors reported to influence the return to work of cancer survivors: A literature review. Psycho-oncology, 11(2), 124–131.PubMedCrossRef
3.
Hansen, J. A., Feuerstein, M., Calvio, L. C., & Olsen, C. H. (2008). Breast cancer survivors at work. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 50(7), 777–784.PubMedCrossRef
4.
Kessler, R. C., Greenberg, P. E., Mickelson, K. D., Meneades, L. M., & Wang, P. S. (2001). The effects of chronic medical conditions on work loss and work cutback. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 43(3), 218–225.PubMedCrossRef
5.
Feuerstein, M., Hansen, J. A., Calvio, L. C., Johnson, L., & Ronquillo, J. G. (2007). Work productivity in brain tumor survivors. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 49(7), 803–811.PubMedCrossRef
6.
Lavigne, J. E., Griggs, J. J., Tu, X. M., & Lerner, D. J. (2008). Hot flashes, fatigue, treatment exposures and work productivity in breast cancer survivors. Journal of Cancer Survivorship, 2(4), 296–302.PubMedCrossRef
7.
Short, P. F., Vasey, J. J., & Belue, R. (2008). Work disability associated with cancer survivorship and other chronic conditions. Psychooncology, 17(1), 91–97.PubMedCrossRef
8.
Oostenbrink, J. B., Bouwmans, C. A. M., Koopmanschap, M. A. et al. (2004). Manual for cost studies, methods and standard cost-prices for economic evaluation in health care. [in Dutch: handleiding voor kostenonderzoek, methoden en standaard kostprijzen voor economische evaluaties]. Den Haag, The Netherlands: Board of health care insurance.
9.
Lerner, D., Amick, B. C., Rogers, W. H., Malspeis, S., Bungay, K., et al. (2001). The Work Limitations Questionnaire. Medical Care, 39(1), 72–85.PubMedCrossRef
10.
Roy, J. S., Desmeules, F., & MacDermid, J. C. (2011). Psychometric properties of presenteeism scales for musculoskeletal disorders: A systematic review. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine, 43(1), 23–31.PubMedCrossRef
11.
Abma, F. I., van der Klink, J. J., Terwee, C. B., Amick Iii, B. C., & Bultmann, U. (2011). Evaluation of the measurement properties of self-reported health-related work-functioning instruments among workers with common mental disorders. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 38(1), 5–18.
12.
Beaton, D. E., Tang, K., Gignac, M. A., Lacaille, D., Badley, E. M., et al. (2010). Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of five at-work productivity measures in patients with rheumatoid arthritis or osteoarthritis. Arthritis Care Research (Hoboken), 62(1), 28–37.CrossRef
13.
de Vet, H. C., Terwee, C. B., Knol, D. L., & Bouter, L. M. (2006). When to use agreement versus reliability measures. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(10), 1033–1039.PubMedCrossRef
14.
Verhoef, J. A., Miedema, H. S., Bramsen, I., & Roebroeck, M. E. (2012). Using the work limitations questionnaire in patients with a chronic condition in the Netherlands. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 54(10), 1293–1299.PubMedCrossRef
15.
de Boer, A. G., van Lanschot, J. J., Stalmeier, P. F., van Sandick, J. W., Hulscher, J. B., et al. (2004). Is a single-item visual analogue scale as valid, reliable and responsive as multi-item scales in measuring quality of life? Quality of Life Research, 13(2), 311–320.PubMedCrossRef
16.
Ilmarinen, J., & Tuomi, K. (1992). Work ability of aging workers. Scandinavian Journal of Work, Environment & Health, 18(Suppl 2), 8–10.
17.
de Zwart, B. C., Frings-Dresen, M. H., & van Duivenbooden, J. C. (2002). Test-retest reliability of the Work Ability Index questionnaire. Occupational Medicine, 52(4), 177–181.PubMedCrossRef
18.
de Haes, J. C., van Knippenberg, F. C., & Neijt, J. P. (1990). Measuring psychological and physical distress in cancer patients: Structure and application of the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist. British Journal of Cancer, 62(6), 1034–1038.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
19.
Terwee, C. B., Bot, S. D., de Boer, M. R., van der Windt, D. A., Knol, D. L., et al. (2007). Quality criteria were proposed for measurement properties of health status questionnaires. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 60(1), 34–42.PubMedCrossRef
20.
Bland, J. M., & Altman, D. G. (1986). Statistical methods for assessing agreement between two methods of clinical measurement. Lancet, 1(8476), 307–310.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Mantha, S., Roizen, M. F., Fleisher, L. A., Thisted, R., & Foss, J. (2000). Comparing methods of clinical measurement: Reporting standards for bland and altman analysis. Anesthesia and Analgesia, 90(3), 593–602.PubMedCrossRef
22.
Rutjes, A. W., Reitsma, J. B., Coomarasamy, A., Khan, K. S., & Bossuyt, P. M. (2007). Evaluation of diagnostic tests when there is no gold standard. A review of methods. Health Technology Assessment, 11(50), iii, ix–51.
23.
Terwee, C. B., Roorda, L. D., Dekker, J., Bierma-Zeinstra, S. M., Peat, G., et al. (2010). Mind the MIC: Large variation among populations and methods. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 63(5), 524–534.PubMedCrossRef
24.
Liang, M. H. (2000). Longitudinal construct validity: Establishment of clinical meaning in patient evaluative instruments. Medical Care, 38(9 Suppl), II84–II90.
25.
Spelten, E. R., Verbeek, J. H., Uitterhoeve, A. L., Ansink, A. C., van der Lelie, J., et al. (2003). Cancer, fatigue and the return of patients to work-a prospective cohort study. European Journal of Cancer, 39(11), 1562–1567.PubMedCrossRef
26.
Schellingerhout, J. M., Heymans, M. W., Verhagen, A. P., de Vet, H. C., Koes, B. W., et al. (2011). Measurement properties of translated versions of neck-specific questionnaires: A systematic review. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 11, 87.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRef
27.
Streiner, D. L., & Norman, G. R. (2008). Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use (4th ed.). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRef
28.
Roy, J. S., MacDermid, J. C., Amick, B. C, I. I. I., Shannon, H. S., McMurtry, R., et al. (2011). Validity and responsiveness of presenteeism scales in chronic work-related upper-extremity disorders. Physical Therapy, 91(2), 254–266.PubMedCrossRef
29.
Walker, N., Michaud, K., & Wolfe, F. (2005). Work limitations among working persons with rheumatoid arthritis: Results, reliability, and validity of the work limitations questionnaire in 836 patients. Journal of Rheumatology, 32(6), 1006–1012.PubMed
30.
Revicki, D., Hays, R. D., Cella, D., & Sloan, J. (2008). Recommended methods for determining responsiveness and minimally important differences for patient-reported outcomes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 61(2), 102–109.PubMedCrossRef
31.
de Haes, J. C., Olschewski, M., & Fayers, P. et al. (1996). Measuring the quality of life of cancer patients with the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL), a manual. Groningen, The Netherlands: Northeren Centre for Healthcare Research.
Metagegevens
Titel
Measurement properties of the Work Limitations Questionnaire were sufficient among cancer survivors
Auteurs
Sietske J. Tamminga
Jos H. A. M. Verbeek
Monique H. W. Frings-Dresen
Angela G. E. M. De Boer
Publicatiedatum
01-03-2014
Uitgeverij
Springer International Publishing
Gepubliceerd in
Quality of Life Research / Uitgave 2/2014
Print ISSN: 0962-9343
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-2649
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11136-013-0484-8

Andere artikelen Uitgave 2/2014

Health-related quality of life (HRQL) in immunodeficient adults with selective IgA deficiency compared with age- and gender-matched controls and identification of risk factors for poor HRQL

Assessment of health-related quality of life 6 years after childhood cochlear implantation

Quality of life among hazardous and harmful drinkers: EQ-5D over a 1-year follow-up period

Quality of life in female cancer survivors: is it related to ovarian reserve?

Economic evaluation in short bowel syndrome (SBS): an algorithm to estimate utility scores for a patient-reported SBS-specific quality of life scale (SBS-QoL™)

Thirty down, only ten to go?! Awareness and influence of a 10-year time frame in TTO