IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/qualqt/v51y2017i1d10.1007_s11135-016-0312-7.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A return-to-work self-efficacy scale for workers with psychological or musculoskeletal work-related injuries

Author

Listed:
  • Oliver Black

    (Monash University)

  • Malcolm R. Sim

    (Monash University)

  • Alexander Collie

    (Monash University
    Monash University)

  • Peter Smith

    (Monash University
    Institute for Work & Health
    University of Toronto)

Abstract

Return-to-work self-efficacy (RTW-SE) is shown to be an important variable for return–to-work after a work-related injury. Previous measures of RTW-SE have been developed exclusively for physical or psychological injuries; however, both injury types occur at work and self-efficacy is likely relevant to return-to-work (RTW) for both types of injuries. The objective of this study was to establish the factor structure and construct validity of a modified RTW-SE measure in a sample of injured workers with musculoskeletal or psychological work-related injuries. Workers’ who suffered a psychological (N = 80) or upper-body musculoskeletal (UB-MSK) (N = 88) injury, and who had not yet returned to work, were presented with 13 items derived from two validated RTW-SE scales. Exploratory Factor Analysis was used to determine the factor structure of RTW-SE. Differences in levels of RTW-SE were then examined across injury type, work absence, and the ability to cope with injury. Three dimensions of RTW-SE were extracted; work completion beliefs (3 items), affective work beliefs (5 items) and work social support beliefs (3 items). The model fit was acceptable and moderate correlations were found between dimensions. The workers’ current ability to cope with the injury was moderately correlated with all RTW-SE dimensions but was lowest with the social dimension. Psychological injuries were associated with lower levels RTW-SE except on the work completion beliefs. Increasing work absence was associated with lower levels of RTW-SE except on affective work beliefs, which plateaued from 51 to 150 days of absence. The structure of RTW-SE was established in a mixed-injury work-related population. The structure was comparable to previous scales; however, the affective work beliefs dimension is unique to the current scale. Other results were in the expected directions.

Suggested Citation

  • Oliver Black & Malcolm R. Sim & Alexander Collie & Peter Smith, 2017. "A return-to-work self-efficacy scale for workers with psychological or musculoskeletal work-related injuries," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 51(1), pages 413-424, January.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:51:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-016-0312-7
    DOI: 10.1007/s11135-016-0312-7
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s11135-016-0312-7
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s11135-016-0312-7?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:qualqt:v:51:y:2017:i:1:d:10.1007_s11135-016-0312-7. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.