Work-related musculoskeletal disorders (WRMD) may be associated with various individual, physical, biomechanical, or psychosocial/organisational risk factors. Self-report questionnaires have increasingly been used to assess patients’ perceptions of injury impact. QuickDASH is a widely used outcome measurement questionnaire but is seldom applied to WRMD.
Objective
To evaluate the construct validity of the Brazilian version of the QuickDASH (QD-Br) in patients with WRMD affecting the upper limbs, hypothesising a moderate correlation with fatigue, ergonomic, and functional questionnaires.
Methods
Workers of a tertiary hospital, such as healthcare professionals and support staff employees with WRMD in the upper limbs and neck were included. The outcome measures were QD-Br, the Numerical Pain Scale (NPS), Isometric Handgrip Strength (GS), Isokinetic Force of Bilateral Shoulder Elevation in the Scapular Plane (ISOAbd), Functional Impairment Test - Hand and Neck/Shoulder/Arm (FIT-HaNSA), and: Patient-Specific Functional Scale (PSFS-Br), Neck Disability Index (NDI-Br), Work Ability Index (WAI-Br), Need for Recovery Scale (NFR-Br), and Quick Exposure Checklist (QEC-Br). Spearman’s Correlation Coefficient (ρ) was calculated to determine the direction and strength of associations.
Results
The sample was 70% female, 63% reporting chronic symptoms. The shoulder was the joint most frequently reported. QD-Br showed moderate positive correlations with NDI-Br and NPS and moderate but negative correlations with WAI-Br and PSFS-Br. It presented weak and positive correlations with NFR-Br, weak and negative correlations with GS, ISOAbd, and FIT-HaNSA, and no correlation with QEC-Br.
Conclusion
QD-Br demonstrated evidence of construct validity for assessing workers with upper limb complaints, effectively reflecting their dysfunctions and symptoms.
WaerstedMHanvoldTNVeierstedKB. Computer work and musculoskeletal disorders of the neck and upper extremity: a systematic review. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2010; 11: 79. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2474-11-79.
2.
AlaviSSMakaremJAbbasiM, et al.Association between upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders and mental health status in office workers. Work2016; 55: 3–11. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-162382.
3.
Muñoz-PobleteCBascour-sandovalCInostroza-QuirozJ, et al.Effectiveness of workplace-based muscle resistance training exercise program in preventing musculoskeletal dysfunction of the upper limbs in manufacturing workers. J Occup Rehabil2019; 29(4): 810–821. DOI: 10.1007/s10926-019-09840-7.
4.
SantosACBredemeierMRosaKF, et al.Impact on the quality of life of an educational program for the prevention of work-related musculoskeletal disorders: a randomized controlled trial. BMC Public Health2011; 11: 60. DOI: 10.1186/1471-2458-11-60.
5.
SchuindFAMourauxDRobertC, et al.Functional and outcome evaluation of the hand and wrist. Hand Clin2003; 19(3): 361–369. DOI: 10.1016/S0749-0712(03)00026-X.
6.
HoeVCWUrquhartDMKelsallHL, et al.Ergonomic interventions for preventing work-related musculoskeletal disorders of the upper limb and neck among office workers. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews2018; 2018(10): CD008570. DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD008570.
7.
JacobsNWBerduszekRJDijkstraPU, et al.Validity and reliability of the upper extremity work demands scale. J Occup Rehabil2017; 27(4): 520–529. DOI: 10.1007/s10926-016-9683-9.
8.
SeftchickJLDetullioLMFedorczykJM, et al.Clinical examination of the hand. In: SkirvenTMOstermanALFedorczykJM, et al. (eds). Rehabilitation of the Hand and Upper Extremity. 6th editionSt. Louis: Mosby, 2011, vol Cap. 6, pp. 55–71.
9.
FanZJSmithCKSilversteinBA. Responsiveness of the QuickDASH and SF-12 in workers with neck or upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders: one-year follow-up. J Occup Rehabil2011; 21(2): 234.
10.
BeatonDEWrightJGKatzJN, et al.Development of the QuickDASH: comparison of three item-reduction approaches. J Bone Joint Surg Am2005; 87(5): 1038. DOI: 10.2106/JBJS.D.02060.
11.
FanZJSmithCKSilversteinBA. Assessing validity of the QuickDASH and SF-12 as surveillance tools among workers with neck or upper extremity musculoskeletal disorders. J Hand Ther2008; 21: 354–365. DOI: 10.1197/j.jht.2008.02.001.
12.
World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health: ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001. https://www.who.int/classifications/icf/en/.
13.
Claro da SilvaNChavesTCdos SantosJ, et al.Reliability, validity, and responsiveness of the Brazilian version of QuickDASH. Musculoskeletal Science and Practice2020; 48: 102163. DOI: 10.1016/j.msksp.2020.102163.
14.
da SilvaNCRicciFPFMde CastroVR, et al.Effects of workplace upper extremity resistance exercises on function and symptoms of workers at a tertiary hospital: a randomized controlled trial protocol. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2022; 23: 119. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-022-05059-5.
15.
AmaralGMMarinhoHVROcarinoJM, et al.Muscular performance Characterization in athletes: a new perspective on isokinetic variables. Braz J Phys Ther2014; 18(6): 521–529. DOI: 10.1590/bjpt-rbf.2014.0047.
16.
FifolatoTMNardimHCBdo Carmo LopesER, et al.Association between muscle strength, upper extremity fatigue resistance, work ability and upper extremity dysfunction in a sample of workers at a tertiary hospital. BMC Musculoskelet Disord2021; 22: 508. DOI: 10.1186/s12891-021-04256-y.
17.
HartrickCTKovanJPShapiroS. The numeric rating scale for clinical pain measurement: a ratio measure?Pain Pract2003; 3(4): 310–316. DOI: 10.1111/j.1530-7085.2003.03034.x.
18.
KumtaPMaCDermidJCMehtaSP, et al.The FIT-HaNSA demonstrates reliability and convergent validity of functional performance in patients with shoulder disorders. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther2012; 42: 455. DOI: 10.2519/jospt.2012.3796.
19.
BalbiLLBarbosaRIMarcolinoAM, et al.Validade, confiabilidade e responsividade da versão brasileira do questionário Patient Specific Functional Scale (PSFS-Br) nas lesões do membro superior. Acta Fisiatr2019; 26(2): 66–70.
20.
CookCRichardsonJKBragaL, et al.Cross-cultural adaptation and validation of the Brazilian Portuguese version of the neck disability Index and neck pain and disability scale. Spine2006; 31: 1621–1627. DOI: 10.1097/01.brs.0000221989.53069.16.
21.
MartinezMCLatorreMRDOFischerFM. Validity and reliability of the Brazilian version of the work ability Index questionnaire. Rev Saude Publica2009; 43: 525–532. DOI: 10.1590/S0034-89102009005000017.
22.
MoriguchiCSAlemMERCouryHJCG. Evaluation of workload among industrial workers with the Need for Recovery Scale. Rev Bras Fisioter2011; 15: 154–159. DOI: 10.1590/S1413-35552011000200011.
23.
ComperMLCostaLOPPadulaRS. Quick exposure check (QEC): a cross-cultural adaptation into Brazilian-Portuguese. Work2012; 41: 2056–2059. DOI: 10.3233/WOR-2012-0430-2056.
24.
American Society of Hand Therapists (ASHT). ASHT clinical assessment recommendationsFessEEMoranC (eds). ASHT Clinical Assessment Recommendations. Garner: The Society, 1981.
25.
PrenticeWEVoightML. Livro Técnicas em Reabilitação Musculoesquelética: Inclui guia de exercícios. São Paulo: Artmed, 2003.
26.
EdouardPCodinePSamozinoP, et al.Reliability of shoulder rotators isokinetic strength imbalance measured using the Biodex dynamometer. J Sci Med Sport2013; 16: 162–165.
De VetHCWTerweeCBMokkinkLB, et al.Measurements in Medicine. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011.
31.
DanceyCPReidyJ. Statistics without Maths for Psychology. 8th edition. London: Pearson, 2020, p. 608.
32.
LunaJSMonteiroGTRKoifmanRJ, et al.International Classification of Functioning in professional rehabilitation: instruments for assessing work disability. Rev Saude Publica2020; 54: 45. DOI: 10.11606/s1518-8787.2020054001463.
33.
FreskMGrootenWJABrodinN, et al.Mapping information regarding the work-related disability of depression and long-term musculoskeletal pain to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health and ICF Core Sets. Front Rehabil Sci2023; 4: 1159208. DOI: 10.3389/fresc.2023.1159208.
34.
SternbergABethgeM. Measuring work functioning in individuals with musculoskeletal disorders with reference to the International Classification of Functioning, Disability, and Health: a systematic literature review. Int J Rehabil Res41(2):p 97-109, 2018. | DOI: 10.1097/MRR.0000000000000283.
35.
BrusacaLAMoriguchiCSBarbieriDF, et al.Brazilian version of need for recovery scale: assessment of structural validity, criterion validity, and internal consistency. Braz J Phys Ther2022; 26(6): 100465. DOI: 10.1016/j.bjpt.2022.100465.
36.
LinakerCHWalker-BoneK. Shoulder disorders and occupation. Best Pract Res Clin Rheumatol2015; 29(3): 405. DOI: 10.1016/j.berh.2015.04.001.
37.
OliveiraSACamposJADBMarôcoJ, et al.Psychometric properties of the Work Limitations Questionnaire applied to nursing workers. Rev Lat Am Enfermagem2021; 29: e3466. DOI: 10.1590/1518-8345.4771.3466.
38.
MacDermidJC. We need clinician-scientists, and clinical researchers. Journal of Hand Therapy2021; 35(2): 159.
