CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: It is still difficult to measure work productivity losses caused by health problems. Despite the importance given to this issue over the last few years, most instruments for performing this task are available only in the English language. This study translated the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment _ General Health (WPAI-GH) Questionnaire into Brazilian Portuguese, adapted it cross-culturally and evaluated its reliability and validity. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey to test scale reliability and validity, at São Paulo Hospital and the clinic of the Rheumatology division of Universidade Federal de São Paulo-Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM). METHODS: Data were obtained from a survey that incorporated the WPAI-GH, short form-36 (SF-36) and some demographic questions. The questionnaires were administered by interview to 100 subjects. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics was used to characterize the subjects. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the reliability and internal consistency of the instrument. Intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.79 to 0.90 indicated good reliability. Cronbach's alpha of 0.74 indicated good internal consistency. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to assess validity. There were significant positive relationships between the WPAI-GH and SF-36. CONCLUSION: The Brazilian Portuguese version of the WPAI-GH is a reliable and valid measurement tool and may be useful for those who seek to measure the impact on productivity of health problems among populations of Brazilian employees.
CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: It is still difficult to measure work productivity losses caused by health problems. Despite the importance given to this issue over the last few years, most instruments for performing this task are available only in the English language. This study translated the Work Productivity and Activity Impairment _ General Health (WPAI-GH) Questionnaire into Brazilian Portuguese, adapted it cross-culturally and evaluated its reliability and validity. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional survey to test scale reliability and validity, at São Paulo Hospital and the clinic of the Rheumatology division of Universidade Federal de São Paulo-Escola Paulista de Medicina (Unifesp-EPM). METHODS: Data were obtained from a survey that incorporated the WPAI-GH, short form-36 (SF-36) and some demographic questions. The questionnaires were administered by interview to 100 subjects. RESULTS: Descriptive statistics was used to characterize the subjects. The intraclass correlation coefficient and Cronbach's alpha were used to assess the reliability and internal consistency of the instrument. Intraclass correlation coefficients from 0.79 to 0.90 indicated good reliability. Cronbach's alpha of 0.74 indicated good internal consistency. Pearson's correlation coefficient was used to assess validity. There were significant positive relationships between the WPAI-GH and SF-36. CONCLUSION: The Brazilian Portuguese version of the WPAI-GH is a reliable and valid measurement tool and may be useful for those who seek to measure the impact on productivity of health problems among populations of Brazilian employees.
Authors: Nilcéia Lopes; Leticia L S Dias; Luna Azulay-Abulafia; Luiza K M Oyafuso; Maria Victoria Suarez; Lincoln Fabricio; Clarice Marie Kobata; Tania Cestari; Bernardo Gontijo; Cid Y Sabbag; João R Antonio; Ricardo Romiti; Patricia C Pertel Journal: Adv Ther Date: 2019-08-20 Impact factor: 3.845
Authors: Rogerio S Parra; Julio M F Chebli; Heda M B S Amarante; Cristina Flores; Jose M L Parente; Odery Ramos; Milene Fernandes; Jose J R Rocha; Marley R Feitosa; Omar Feres; Antonio S Scotton; Rodrigo B Nones; Murilo M Lima; Cyrla Zaltman; Carolina D Goncalves; Isabella M Guimaraes; Genoile O Santana; Ligia Y Sassaki; Rogerio S Hossne; Mauro Bafutto; Roberto L K Junior; Mikaell A G Faria; Sender J Miszputen; Tarcia N F Gomes; Wilson R Catapani; Anderson A Faria; Stella C S Souza; Rosana F Caratin; Juliana T Senra; Maria L A Ferrari Journal: World J Gastroenterol Date: 2019-10-14 Impact factor: 5.742
Authors: Franklin C Barcellos; Iná S Santos; Grégore Iven Mielke; Fabrício B del Vecchio; Pedro C Hallal Journal: BMC Nephrol Date: 2012-08-28 Impact factor: 2.388