Cognitive workload has emerged as one of the most important topics that must be understood and addressed because of its impact on errors and work performance that will compromise patient safety. With increasing patient health demands, Allied Health Professionals (AHPs) tend to have heavier cognitive workloads and impact on personal well-being.
Objective
Our study aims to determine the validity and reliability of a cognitive workload scale for AHP in Malacca, Malaysia and examine its effect on personal well-being.
Method
The instrument comprises items related to human reliability, human-computer interaction, decision-making, skilled performance, training, work stress and cognitive ergonomic effect. The content validation was conducted using the Content Validity Questionnaire with eight expert panels’ responses. 120 AHP working in Malacca were recruited using purposive sampling and took part in the study, completing the online questionnaires. To evaluate the validity based on relationships with other measures, the SMEQ scale was also administered. AMOS Version 24 and IBM SPSS Version 26 were used in data analysis.
Results
The instrument showed good content validity (CVI > 0.74). After the deletion of six items, the instrument has good convergent validity (AVE > 0.5), discriminant validity (HTMT Ratio < 0.85), composite reliability (CR > 0.7), internal consistency (alpha > 0.7), construct validity the ratio (1.865), CFI (0.900), PCFI (0.821), PNFI (0.738), RMSEA (0.085), IFI (0.90) and test-retest reliability (ICC > 0.6). The study found a positive correlation with the Malay version of SMEQ. This study also found that the AHP in the laboratory group have higher work stress and experiences more cognitive load effects, leading to lower personal well-being.
Conclusion
Overall, the final version of a scale measuring the cognitive workload is valid and reliable in assessing cognitive ergonomics among AHP. Testing cognitive workload on different work populations, including manual and non-manual workers, is recommended for future studies.
KazemiRSmithA. Overcoming COVID-19 pandemic: emerging challenges of human factors and the role of cognitive ergonomics. Theor Issues in Ergon Sci2023; 24: 401–412.
2.
DuMHuK. Frontline health care workers’ mental workload during the COVID-19 pandemic: a cross-sectional study. Asia-Pac J Public Health2021; 33: 303–305.
3.
CarayonPWustKHoseBZ,et al.Human factors and ergonomics in health care. In: Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2021, pp. 1417–1437.
4.
PriviteraMR. Promoting clinician well-being and patient safety using human factors science: reducing unnecessary occupational stress. Health2022; 14: 1334–1356.
5.
StevensELHulmeASalmonPM. The impact of power on health care team performance and patient safety: a review of the literature. Ergonomics2021; 64: 1072–1090.
6.
HowieEEDharanikotaHGunnE, et al.Cognitive load management: an invaluable tool for safe and effective surgical training. J Surg Educ2023; 80: 311–322.
7.
HeponiemiTGluschkoffKVehkoT, et al.Electronic health record implementations and insufficient training endanger nurses’ well-being: cross-sectional survey study. J Med Internet Res2021; 23: e27096.
8.
NestorSO’TuathaighCO’BrienTJ. Assessing the impact of COVID-19 on healthcare staff at a combined elderly care and specialist palliative care facility: a cross-sectional study. Palliat Med2021; 35: 1492–1501.
9.
MäkikangasALeiterMPKinnunenU,et al.Profiling development of burnout over eight years: relation with job demands and resources. Eur J Work Org Psychol2021; 30: 720–731.
10.
KhatabZHannaKRofaeilA, et al.Pathologist workload, burnout, and wellness: connecting the dots. Crit Rev Clin Lab Sci2023; 61: 1–21.
11.
ChristyDDuraisamyS. Ergonomics and employee psychological well being. Int J Manag2020; 11: 435–438.
12.
SzulewskiAHowesDvan MerriënboerJJG,et al.From theory to practice: the application of cognitive load theory to the practice of medicine. Acad Med2021; 96: 24–30.
13.
VellaKMHallAKvan MerrienboerJJG, et al.An exploratory investigation of the measurement of cognitive load on shift: application of cognitive load theory in emergency medicine. AEM educ Train2021; 5: e10634.
14.
Mohd PauziM. Investigation on the effect of cognitive ergonomic of final year student workload. 2018.
15.
Mohd'AizatMB. Mental workload assessment among healthcare workers during pandemic COVID-19 at Hospital Tunku Azizah/Mohd'Aizat Mohd Basari. Doctoral dissertation, Universiti Malaya, 2020.
16.
Profile of Allied Health Professions in Ministry of Health Malaysia A Consultation Report by World Health Organization (WHO). In: Allied Health Sciences Division MP, Ministry of Health, Malaysia., editor. Policy & Strategic Planning Section, Allied Health Sciences Division, Medical Programme, Ministry of Health Malaysia 2020.
17.
MuaidiQIShanbAA. Effects of work demands on physical therapists in the KSA. J Taibah Univ Med Sci2016; 11: 56–62.
18.
GorcePJacquier-BretJ. Global prevalence of musculoskeletal disorders among physiotherapists: a systematic review and meta-analysis. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2023; 24: 265.
19.
KellyMSolesRGarciaE,et al.Job stress, burnout, work-life balance, well-being, and job satisfaction among pathology residents and fellows. Am J Clin Pathol2020; 153: 449–469.
20.
RotemEPDARobertsDG. Profile of Allied Health Professions in Ministry of Health Malaysia A Consultation Report by World Health Organization (WHO). In: Allied Health Sciences Division MP, Ministry of Health, Malaysia., editor. 2020.
21.
CoatesDClerkeT. Training interventions to equip health care professionals with shared decision-making skills: a systematic scoping review. J Contin Educ Health Prof2020; 40: 100–119.
22.
FistaBAzisHAprilyaT, et al.Review of cognitive ergonomic measurement tools. IOP Conf Ser: Mater Sci Eng2019; 598: 012131.
23.
Guidelines On Ergonomics Risk Assessment At Workplace. In: Department Of Occupational Safety And Health MOHRM, editor. Department Of Occupational Safety And Health, Ministry Of Human Resources Malaysia: Department Of Occupational Safety And Health, Ministry Of Human Resources Malaysia; 2017.
24.
ValdezDMontenegroMSCrawfordBL, et al.Translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches as a component of health research and practice: a discussion and taxonomy of popular translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches. Soc SciMed2021; 278: 113931.
25.
LiuCWangDLiuC, et al.What is the meaning of health literacy? A systematic review and qualitative synthesis. Fam Med Community Health2020; 8: e000351.
26.
ValdezDMontenegroMSCrawfordBL, et al.Translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches as a component of health research and practice: a discussion and taxonomy of popular translation frameworks and questionnaire design approaches. Soc Sci Med (1982)2021; 278: 113931.
27.
ShaMGabelT. The essential role of language in survey research. USA: Rti Press, 2020.
28.
WengY-HKuoKNYangC-Y, et al.Implementation of evidence-based practice across medical, nursing, pharmacological and allied healthcare professionals: a questionnaire survey in nationwide hospital settings. Implement Sci2013; 8: 1–10.
29.
ShahirahMRHanif FarhanMRDayana HazwaniMSN. Translation, validation and reliability testing of the subjective mental effort questionnaire (SMEQ) from English into the malay language. Med Health2023; 18: 515–529.
30.
LuCHuYFuQ, et al.Physician mental workload scale in China: development and psychometric evaluation. BMJ Open2019; 9: e030137.
31.
WHO. WHO Guidelines on Translation and Adaptation of Instruments. 2017.
32.
WalkerMStantonPHalvorsenB,et al.Allied health professionals: hidden but essential. In: Research handbook on contemporary human resource management for health care. USA: Edward Elgar Publishing, 2024, pp. 149–163.
33.
KalakoskiVHeneliusAOikarinenE, et al.Cognitive ergonomics for data analysis. Experimental study of cognitive limitations in a data-based judgement task. BehavInf Technol2019; 38: 1–10.
34.
BevanNMacleodM. Usability measurement in context. Behav Inf Technol1994; 13: 132–145.
35.
TinagaranSMohd RasdiHFHarunD, et al.Psychometric properties of the malay version of the personal wellbeing index: a preliminary study among caregivers of children with autism spectrum disorder. Jurnal Sains Kesihatan Malaysia (Malaysian Journal of Health Sciences)2023; 21: 157–165.
36.
DutilÉBottariCAugerC. Test-retest reliability of a measure of independence in everyday activities: the ADL profile. Occup Ther Int2017; 2017: 3014579.
37.
PolitDFBeckCT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health2006; 29: 489–497.
38.
ZamanzadehVRassouliMAbbaszadehA, et al.Details of content validity and objectifying it in instrument development. Nurs Pract Today2014; 1: 163–171.
39.
Ab HamidMRSamiWMohmad SidekMH. Discriminant validity assessment: use of fornell & larcker criterion versus HTMT criterion. J Phys: Conf Ser2017; 890: 012163.
40.
AwangZ. A handbook on structural equation modeling. Bandar Baru Bangi, Selangor, Malaysia: MPWS Rich Resources, 2014.
41.
HuLBentlerPM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model1999; 6: 1–55.
Hair JrJFSarstedtMHopkinsL,et al.Partial least squares structural equation modeling (PLS-SEM). Eur Bus Rev2014; 26: 106–121.
44.
HairJHultGTMRingleC,et al.A Primer on Partial Least Squares Structural Equation Modeling (PLS-SEM). 2022.
45.
Senthilnathan SJAaS. Usefulness of correlation analysis. 2019.
46.
CicchettiDV. Guidelines, criteria, and rules of thumb for evaluating normed and standardized assessment instruments in psychology. Psychol Assess1994; 6: 284.
47.
BlandJMAltmanDG. Measuring agreement in method comparison studies. Stat Methods Med Res1999; 8: 135–160.
Hancock G, Longo L, Young M, et al. Mental workload. In: Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2021, pp. 203–226.
50.
GoyalPTilleyEHLatifiR. Healthcare provider-centered: ergonomics of movement and functionality. In: The modern hospital. Switzerland: Springer, 2019, pp. 195–201.
51.
SpiegelT. Cognitive process elements of people decision-making. In: Encyclopedia of information science and technology. 4th ed.USA: IGI Global, 2018, pp. 2076–2084.
52.
FeatherstonRDownieLEVogelAP,et al.Decision making biases in the allied health professions: a systematic scoping review. PLoS One2020; 15: e0240716.
53.
DrewsFABakdashJZ. Simulation training in health care. Rev Hum Factors Ergon2013; 8: 191–234.
54.
ShinnersLAggarCGraceS,et al.Exploring healthcare professionals’ understanding and experiences of artificial intelligence technology use in the delivery of healthcare: an integrative review. Health Informat J2020; 26: 1225–1236.
55.
LiuPZhangRYinZ,et al.Human errors and human reliability. In: Handbook of human factors and ergonomics. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons Inc., 2021, pp. 514–572.
56.
AhmedZSaadaMJonesAM,et al.Medical errors: healthcare professionals’ perspective at a tertiary hospital in Kuwait. PLoS One2019; 14: e0217023.
57.
ChenYFangWGuoB,et al.The moderation effects of task attributes and mental fatigue on post-interruption task performance in a concurrent multitasking environment. Appl Ergon2022; 102: 103764.
58.
HuLBentlerPM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Model: Multidiscip J1999; 6: 1–55.
59.
MeyersLSGamstGGuarinoAJ. Applied multivariate research : design and interpretation. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, 2006.
60.
RoaldsenKSMåøyÅBJørgensenV,et al.Test-retest reliability at the item level and total score level of the Norwegian version of the spinal cord injury falls concern scale (SCI-FCS). J Spinal Cord Med2016; 39: 317–326.
61.
GarciaEKunduIKellyM, et al.The American society for clinical pathology’s job satisfaction, well-being, and burnout survey of laboratory professionals. Am J Clin Pathol2020; 153: 470–486.
62.
AlrawahiSSellgrenSFAltoubyS, et al.The application of herzberg's two-factor theory of motivation to job satisfaction in clinical laboratories in omani hospitals. Heliyon2020; 6: e04829.
63.
RajanD. Shift work, workload, and professionalism related motivators affecting job satisfaction: an empirical study among medical laboratory technicians. Health Econ Manag Rev2023; 4: 1–21.
64.
EwenCJenkinsHJacksonC, et al.Well-being, job satisfaction, stress and burnout in speech-language pathologists: a review. Int J Speech-Language Pathol2021; 23: 180–190.
65.
PopovaESHahnBJMorrisH, et al.Exploring well-being: resilience, stress, and self-care in occupational therapy practitioners and students. OTJR (Thorofare N J)2023; 43: 159–169.
66.
PriyadharshiniRDivyaD. Work-life balance in the healthcare industry. Univ J Econ2023; XXVII: 91–98.
67.
AlNekhilanAFAlTamimiAMAlAqeelBY, et al.Work-related musculoskeletal disorders among clinical laboratory workers. Avicenna J Med2020; 10: 29–34.
68.
DeeneyCO’SullivanLW. Effects of cognitive loading and force on upper trapezius fatigue. Occup Med2017; 67: 678–683.
69.
BeckerLKalteneggerHCNowakD, et al.Biological stress responses to multitasking and work interruptions: a randomized controlled trial. Psychoneuroendocrinology2023; 156: 106358.
70.
LesoVFontanaLCaturanoA, et al.Impact of shift work and long working hours on worker cognitive functions: current evidence and future research needs. Int J Environ Res Public Health2021; 18: 6540.
71.
JacquetLPaucsikMGuyJ-B, et al.Self-compassion and psychological well-being of radiographers at work. Int J Qual Studies Health Well-Being2024; 19: 2287621.
72.
CostaRStangarlin-FioriLBertinRL,et al.Satisfaction of nutritionists who work in food service. Revista de Nutrição2019; 32: e180168.
73.
KuoT-SChuL-CKaoP-L,et al.The effect of job satisfaction on psychological well-being for Taiwanese home-care workers, mediated by emotional labor. Healthcare (Basel)2023; 11: 2514.
74.
CohenCPignataSBezakE, et al.Workplace interventions to improve well-being and reduce burnout for nurses, physicians and allied healthcare professionals: a systematic review. BMJ Open2023; 13: e071203.
75.
FoxKEJohnsonSTBerkmanLF, et al.Organisational-and group-level workplace interventions and their effect on multiple domains of worker well-being: a systematic review. Work Stress2022; 36: 30–59.
76.
WiradhanyWvan VugtMKNieuwensteinMR. Media multitasking, mind-wandering, and distractibility: a large-scale study. Atten Percept Psychophys2020; 82: 1112–1124.
77.
BerdotSVilfaillotABezieY, et al.Effectiveness of a ‘do not interrupt’ vest intervention to reduce medication errors during medication administration: a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial. BMC Nurs2021; 20: 153.
78.
RabanMZWestbrookJI. Are interventions to reduce interruptions and errors during medication administration effective?: a systematic review. BMJ Qual Saf2014; 23: 414–421.
79.
KelloggKMPuthumanaJSFongA, et al.Understanding the types and effects of clinical interruptions and distractions recorded in a multihospital patient safety reporting system. J Patient Saf2021; 17: e1394–ee400.
80.
SextonJBAdairKC. Forty-five good things: a prospective pilot study of the three good things well-being intervention in the USA for healthcare worker emotional exhaustion, depression, work–life balance and happiness. BMJ Open2019; 9: e022695.
