Measurement of barriers to perform periodic examinations: development and psychometric properties scale. Issue 2 (3rd April 2023)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Akbari, Hossein; Hannani, Mitra; Motalebi Kashani, Masoud; Sadaf, Marzie; Saberi, Hamid Reza; Bidgoli, Sedighe Dehghani; Karamali, Fahimeh
• Is Part Of: International journal of occupational safety and ergonomics. Volume 29:Issue 2(2023)
• Page Start: 941
• Page End: 949
• Publication Date: 2023-04-03
• Subjects: barriers -- occupational periodic examinations -- psychometric -- scale -- validity -- reliability; Human engineering -- Periodicals; Industrial safety -- Periodicals; Human Engineering -- Periodicals; Occupational Health -- Periodicals; Ergonomie -- Périodiques; Sécurité du travail -- Périodiques; Human engineering; Industrial safety; Periodicals; 620.8
• DOI: 10.1080/10803548.2022.2089467
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1080-3548

Abstract

Abstract : Objectives. Due to recent changes in workplace risks, it is required to investigate the motivations of employees and employers for occupational examination performance. This study aims to develop a self-report scale to overcome prior methodological defects and evaluate barriers of performing periodic examinations. Methods. The study was conducted with 200 participants, including employers, occupational health inspectors, occupational physicians and occupational health experts working in the industrial sector, aged 25–70 years. The subjects supplied sociodemographic information and completed the experimental version of the instrument. Results . Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) provided evidence for a five-factor model, including knowledge, quality, law, capability and service, with 62.68% variance. Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) proved stability rates of both models (root mean square error of approximation [rmsea] = 0.062, comparative fit index [CFI] = 0.92, Tucker–Lewis index [TLI] = 0.906, incremental fit index [IFI] = 0.921, normed fit index [NFI] = 0.835, relative fit index [RFI] = 0.808). The scale also revealed appropriate levels of reliability ( α = 0.916 and composite reliability [CR] >0.7) and validity (average variance extracted >0.5). Conclusion . The psychometric characteristics of the scale demonstrated acceptable validity and reliability. This study developed this valid instrument to be used by health decision-makers for assessing barriers of performing periodic examinations.