Measurement Properties of the Full and Brief Version of the Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire in Persons with Physical Disabilities.
Ellen H Roels, Michiel F Reneman, Marcel W M Post
PMID 33844131WHAT IT FOUND
The Dutch Work Rehabilitation Questionnaire is reliable for groups but too noisy for tracking individual patient progress.
The full and brief versions do not match closely enough to swap between them. Use one version consistently if you must monitor change, though group-level research remains valid.
Key findings
01Internal consistency and test-retest reliability were good for both the full and brief versions of the questionnaire.
02Large score differences are needed at the individual level to confirm change beyond random chance, meaning the tool is not sensitive enough to monitor individual patient progress reliably.
03The full and brief versions are not interchangeable because agreement between them was poor, requiring moderate to large differences to distinguish true change from noise.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for PTsWhat it means for OTs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
The time between questionnaires was up to 27 days, which is long enough for patients in active rehabilitation to genuinely change their health status, potentially confusing the reliability results. The sample size was small and included a mix of different disabilities (stroke, spinal cord injury, etc.), so the results may not apply equally to each specific group. The brief version scores were calculated from the answers given to the full version, not by having patients fill out the brief version separately, which might have influenced how they answered. The study did not test the WORQ in a clinical setting where it is currently in routine use, as it is still considered experimental in the Netherlands.
The easy way to misread this
Do not assume that a change in a single patient's WORQ score reflects real improvement or decline. The study showed that very large score differences are needed to exceed the limits of agreement at the individual level, so small changes are likely just measurement error.