Validity and Reliability of the Upper Extremity Work Demands Scale

Abstract

Purpose To evaluate validity and reliability of the upper extremity work demands (UEWD) scale. Methods Participants from different levels of physical work demands, based on the Dictionary of Occupational Titles categories, were included. A historical database of 74 workers was added for factor analysis. Criterion validity was evaluated by comparing observed and self-reported UEWD scores. To assess structural validity, a factor analysis was executed. For reliability, the difference between two self-reported UEWD scores, the smallest detectable change (SDC), test–retest reliability and internal consistency were determined. Results Fifty-four participants were observed at work and 51 of them filled in the UEWD twice with a mean interval of 16.6 days (SD 3.3, range = 10–25 days). Criterion validity of the UEWD scale was moderate (r = .44, p = .001). Factor analysis revealed that ‘force and posture’ and ‘repetition’ subscales could be distinguished with Cronbach’s alpha of .79 and .84, respectively. Reliability was good; there was no significant difference between repeated measurements. An SDC of 5.0 was found. Test–retest reliability was good (intraclass correlation coefficient for agreement = .84) and all item-total correlations were >.30. There were two pairs of highly related items. Conclusion Reliability of the UEWD scale was good, but criterion validity was moderate. Based on current results, a modified UEWD scale (2 items removed, 1 item reworded, divided into 2 subscales) was proposed. Since observation appeared to be an inappropriate gold standard, we advise to investigate other types of validity, such as construct validity, in further research.

Construct validity and test–retest reliability of the revised Upper Extremity Work Demands (UEWD-R) Scale

“…UEWD was originally developed by Opsteegh et al 6 and revised by Jacobs et al 15. UEWD-R is a six-item questionnaire enquiring after the physical effort that participants exert with the upper extremities during their work.…”

“…The physical work demand items of the upper extremities were extracted from the Dutch musculoskeletal questionnaire14 to establish the UEWD. A previous study concerning UEWD measured a good reliability, but the criterion validity came short 15. UEWD was proposed to be adapted to a revised version.…”

“…Factor analysis distinguished two factors, namely the force exertion/awkward posture factor and the repetition factor, resulting in two subscales, ‘force/posture subscale’ and ‘repetition subscale’. Furthermore, two questions were deleted because of a high correlation with other questions, and one question was rephrased 15. This revised (R) version, from now on called UEWD-R, requires further testing of reliability and validity 15.…”

“…Furthermore, two questions were deleted because of a high correlation with other questions, and one question was rephrased 15. This revised (R) version, from now on called UEWD-R, requires further testing of reliability and validity 15. Therefore, the aim of this study is to assess the construct validity and the test–retest reliability of UEWD-R.…”

Musculoskeletal complaints in individuals with finger or partial hand amputations in the Netherlands: a cross-sectional study

“…The construct validity of this method varies from moderate to very strong, depending on the kind of production output [20]. Furthermore, physical work demands were assessed using the Upper Extremity Work Demands (UEWD) score [21], which was found to have good reliability, but moderate criterion validity [22]. The UEWD consists of seven items, each with four answer possibilities, which are summed to create a total score, ranging from 7 (lowest UEWDs) to 28 (highest UEWDs).…”