The Brazilian Portuguese version of the revised Maastricht Upper Extremity Questionnaire (MUEQ-Br revised): translation, cross-cultural adaptation, reliability, and structural validation

Abstract

BackgroundComplaints of the arm, neck, and shoulders (CANS) have a multifactorial etiology, and, therefore, their assessment should consider both work-related ergonomic and psychosocial aspects. The Maastricht Upper Extremity Questionnaire (MUEQ) is one of a few specific tools available to evaluate the nature and occurrence of CANS in computer-office workers and the impact of psychosocial and ergonomic aspects on work conditions. The purpose of the present study was to perform a translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the MUEQ to Brazilian Portuguese and verify the reliability, internal consistency, and structural validity of the MUEQ in Brazilian computer-office workers.MethodsThe cross-cultural adaptation consisted of five stages (forward translation of the MUEQ to Brazilian Portuguese, synthesis of the translation, back-translation, expert committee meeting, and the pre-final-version test). In the pre-final-version test, 55 computer-office workers participated. For reproducibility, a sample of 50 workers completed the questionnaire twice within a one-week interval. A sample of 386 workers from the University of São Paulo (mean age = 37.44 years; 95% confidence interval: 36.50–38.38; 216 women and 170 men) participated on the structural validation and internal consistency analysis. Intraclass correlation coefficient was used for the statistical analysis of reproducibility, Cronbach’s alpha was used for internal consistency, and confirmatory factor analysis was used for structural validity.ResultsThe calculation of internal consistency, reproducibility, and cross validation provided evidence of reliability and lack of redundancy. The psychometric properties of the modified MUEQ-Br revised were assessed using confirmatory factor analysis, which revealed 6 factors and 41 questions. For this model, the comparative fit index (CFI), goodness-of-fit index (GFI), and non-normed fit index (NNFI) each achieved 0.90, and the consistent Akaike information criterion (CAIC), chi-square, expected cross-validation index (ECIV), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) demonstrated better values.ConclusionsThe results provide a basis for using the 41-item MUEQ-Br revised for the assessment of computer-office workers’ perceptions of the psychosocial and ergonomic aspects of CANS and musculoskeletal-complaint characterization.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12891-015-0497-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Prevalence of Musculoskeletal Complaints of Arm, Neck and Shoulder and Associated Risk Factors in Computer Office Workers

“…support [15]. The questioners were distributed to all participants as the researchers visited each office.…”

Differences in ergonomic and workstation factors between computer office workers with and without reported musculoskeletal pain

“…The sample consisted of male and female employees who had been in the same job position for at least 12 months and who used a desktop computer for a minimum of four of their daily working hours [16]. To obtain this information the MUEQ-Br revised was completed first [21]. Three volunteers were excluded due to the impossibility to adequately assess and analyze the video recordings.…”

“…In this way, the final sample size involved in this study was 35 computer officer workers divided into two subgroups: workers with MSP [(WMSP; n = 17) and without MSP report (WOMSP; n = 18)]. The eligibility criteria for the group WMSP were: self-reported MSP (complaint section of the MUEQ-Br revised [21]) and chronic MSP [22] -at least 3-month duration of pain symptoms [22,23]. Only workers who did not report any MSP in the last three months were included in the WOMSP group.…”

“…MUEQ is a self-administered questionnaire used to assess the occurrence, nature and possible workrelated physical and psychological factors associated to CANS among computer users [21]. The MUEQ-Br revised is composed of six domains (workstation -6 questions, 0 to 6 points; body posture during work -6 questions, 0 to18 points; job control -0 to 27 points, 9 questions; job demands -0 to 21 points, 7 questions; quality of break time -0 to 18 points, 6 questions and social support -0 to 21 points, 7 questions).…”

“…Greater the sum score, greater the perception of the worker about the interference of psychosocial and ergonomics aspects on work context. The MUEQ-Br revised demonstrated good levels of internal consistency and reliability, and cross-validation provided evidence of lack redundancy [21]. The MUEQ-Br revised was completed by the computer office workers prior to the video recordings in order to determine if the worker was eligible for the study.…”