G Gard1, M Rivano, B Grahn. 1. Department of Physical Therapy, Lund University, Lund, Sweden.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the development of the Motivation for Change Questionnaire (MCQ) and to test its intra-patient reliability on musculoskeletal pain patients in interdisciplinary rehabilitation as a basis for use in rehabilitation planning. METHOD: The MCQ questionnaire was developed from a literature search in the Medline, Cinahl and Psychlit databases concerning motivating factors for change in the life and work situation. Questions covering these factors were developed (item generation). Factor analysis of the questions implied a reduction of the number of questions (item reduction). Inter-item correlation was assessed on the baseline administration of the questionnaire by calculating Cronbach's alpha. When testing the structure of the scales, it was shown that the MCQ questionnaire could be described in two scales, one scale relating to motivation for change in the life situation and the other focusing on motivation for change in the work situation and in total 49 questions. RESULTS: The test -- retest reliability was calculated using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. One question was excluded due to the threshold limit of > 0.5. Seven scales relating to the life situation were accepted by the analysis: social support, mastery in life, challenges in life, control in life, values, self-efficacy and self-confidence. Six scales relating to the work situation were also accepted: co-worker support, supervisory support, challenges in work, job control, interaction and job-satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The MCQ questionnaire with 48 questions is reliable for use on musculoskeletal pain patients in interdisciplinary rehabilitation. It can be used to identify each individual's motivating factors for change in life and work situation as a basis for motivational work within rehabilitation and/or to measure within-subject changes in motivation over time. The validity and the responsiveness of the MCQ, need to be studied.
PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to describe the development of the Motivation for Change Questionnaire (MCQ) and to test its intra-patient reliability on musculoskeletal painpatients in interdisciplinary rehabilitation as a basis for use in rehabilitation planning. METHOD: The MCQ questionnaire was developed from a literature search in the Medline, Cinahl and Psychlit databases concerning motivating factors for change in the life and work situation. Questions covering these factors were developed (item generation). Factor analysis of the questions implied a reduction of the number of questions (item reduction). Inter-item correlation was assessed on the baseline administration of the questionnaire by calculating Cronbach's alpha. When testing the structure of the scales, it was shown that the MCQ questionnaire could be described in two scales, one scale relating to motivation for change in the life situation and the other focusing on motivation for change in the work situation and in total 49 questions. RESULTS: The test -- retest reliability was calculated using the intra-class correlation coefficient (ICC) and 95% confidence intervals were calculated. One question was excluded due to the threshold limit of > 0.5. Seven scales relating to the life situation were accepted by the analysis: social support, mastery in life, challenges in life, control in life, values, self-efficacy and self-confidence. Six scales relating to the work situation were also accepted: co-worker support, supervisory support, challenges in work, job control, interaction and job-satisfaction. CONCLUSIONS: The MCQ questionnaire with 48 questions is reliable for use on musculoskeletal painpatients in interdisciplinary rehabilitation. It can be used to identify each individual's motivating factors for change in life and work situation as a basis for motivational work within rehabilitation and/or to measure within-subject changes in motivation over time. The validity and the responsiveness of the MCQ, need to be studied.
Authors: Mallory O Johnson; Torsten B Neilands; Samantha E Dilworth; Stephen F Morin; Robert H Remien; Margaret A Chesney Journal: J Behav Med Date: 2007-06-23
Authors: Proscovia Nabunya; Ozge Sensoy Bahar; Bin Chen; Daji Dvalishvili; Christopher Damulira; Fred M Ssewamala Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2020-03-17 Impact factor: 3.295