OBJECTIVE: To translate the Need for Recovery Scale (NFR) into Brazilian Portuguese and culturally adapt it and assess the stability, internal consistency and convergent validity of the Brazilian scale among industrial workers. METHODS: The translation process followed the guidelines for cultural adaptation of questionnaires including the steps of translation, synthesis, back translation, expert committee review, and pre-testing. The Brazilian Portuguese NFR, final version (Br-NFR) was assessed for stability (n=52) and internal consistency (n=192) and for convergent validity through simultaneous assessment with other instruments: the Borg Scale (n=59); the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (n=57) and 3 subscales of the SF-36 (n=56). RESULTS: Stability and internal consistency met the criterion for a reliable measure (ICC=0.80 and Cronbach's alpha =0.87, respectively). The convergent validity between Br-NFR and other instruments also showed good results: Borg Scale (r= 0.64); Chalder Questionnaire (r= 0.67); SF-36 subscales: vitality (r= -0.84), physical functioning (r= -0.54), and role-physical (r= -0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The Br-NFR proved to be a reliable instrument to evaluate work-related fatigue symptoms in industrial workers. Furthermore, it showed significant and good correlations with well-established instruments such as the Borg Scale, the Chalder Questionnaire and SF-36 vitality subscale, supporting the validity of the Br-NFR.
OBJECTIVE: To translate the Need for Recovery Scale (NFR) into Brazilian Portuguese and culturally adapt it and assess the stability, internal consistency and convergent validity of the Brazilian scale among industrial workers. METHODS: The translation process followed the guidelines for cultural adaptation of questionnaires including the steps of translation, synthesis, back translation, expert committee review, and pre-testing. The Brazilian Portuguese NFR, final version (Br-NFR) was assessed for stability (n=52) and internal consistency (n=192) and for convergent validity through simultaneous assessment with other instruments: the Borg Scale (n=59); the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (n=57) and 3 subscales of the SF-36 (n=56). RESULTS: Stability and internal consistency met the criterion for a reliable measure (ICC=0.80 and Cronbach's alpha =0.87, respectively). The convergent validity between Br-NFR and other instruments also showed good results: Borg Scale (r= 0.64); Chalder Questionnaire (r= 0.67); SF-36 subscales: vitality (r= -0.84), physical functioning (r= -0.54), and role-physical (r= -0.47). CONCLUSIONS: The Br-NFR proved to be a reliable instrument to evaluate work-related fatigue symptoms in industrial workers. Furthermore, it showed significant and good correlations with well-established instruments such as the Borg Scale, the Chalder Questionnaire and SF-36 vitality subscale, supporting the validity of the Br-NFR.
Authors: Matthew L Stevens; Patrick Crowley; Anne H Garde; Ole S Mortensen; Clas-Håkan Nygård; Andreas Holtermann Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2019-07-02 Impact factor: 3.390
Authors: Hanneke E M van der Hoek-Snieders; Monique Boymans; Bas Sorgdrager; Wouter A Dreschler Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2020-06-07 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Yang Wang; Adriana A Zekveld; Dorothea Wendt; Thomas Lunner; Graham Naylor; Sophia E Kramer Journal: PLoS One Date: 2018-06-13 Impact factor: 3.240