Content and concurrent validity of the Motivation for Change Questionnaire

Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation

Volumn 18, Issue 1, 2008, Pages 68-78

  Grahn, Birgitta ^a,b   Gard, Gunvor ^b,c  

^a R and D Welfare of Southern Småland ^*  (Sweden)

^b LUND UNIVERSITY   (Sweden)

^c LULEÅ UNIVERSITY OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

Author keywords

Motivation; Musculoskeletal disorder; Questionnaire; Rehabilitation; Validity

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; CONCURRENT VALIDITY; CONTENT VALIDITY; FEMALE; HEALTH PROMOTION; HUMAN; MAJOR CLINICAL STUDY; MALE; MOTIVATION; MOTIVATION FOR CHANGE QUSTIONNAIRE; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASE; PATIENT ATTITUDE; QUESTIONNAIRE; VOCATIONAL REHABILITATION;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADULT; AGED; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; MIDDLE AGED; MOTIVATION; MUSCULOSKELETAL DISEASES; PAIN; PSYCHOMETRICS; QUALITY OF LIFE; QUESTIONNAIRES; REHABILITATION, VOCATIONAL; REPRODUCIBILITY OF RESULTS; SICK LEAVE; SWEDEN;

EID: 41049105036     PISSN: 10530487     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1007/s10926-008-9122-7     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Antonovsky A. Unraveling the mystery of health. San Fransisco: Jossey-Bass; 1987.
2. Gard G. Work motivating factors in rehabilitation: a brief review. Phys Ther Rev 2001;6:85-9.
3. Grahn B, Ekdahl C, Borquist L. Motivation as a predictor of changes in quality of life and working ability in multidisciplinary rehabilitation. A two-year follow-up of a prospective controlled study on patients with prolonged musculoskeletal disorders. Disabil Rehabil 2000;22:639-54.
4. Ekberg K. An epidemiological approach to disorders in the neck and shoulders. PhD thesis, Department of Occupational and Environmental Medicine, Faculty of Health Science, Linköping University, Linköping, Sweden, 1994.
5. Meerding WJ, Bonneux L, Polder JJ, Koopmanschap MA, van der Maas PJ. Demographic and epistemological determinants of health costs in Netherlands: cost of illness study. Br Med J 1998;317:111-5.
6. Steers R, Porter L. Motivation and work behaviour. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1991.
7. Gard G, Rivano-Fisher M. Motivation for change. Development and reliability test of a new instrument. World congress of physical therapy, Barcelona, 12-15 may 2003.
8. Day H. Motivational factors in rehabilitation. J Leisurabil 1977;4:13-21.
9. Ekelund M, Eriksson S, Fugl-Meyer AR. Vocational rehabilitation in Northern Sweden. Some psycho-socio-demographic predictors. Scand J Rehabil Med 1991;23:73-82.
10. DuCharme KA, Brawley LR. Predicting the intentions and behaviour of exercise initiates using two forms of self-efficacy. J Behav Med 1995;18:479-97.
11. Lewthwaite R. Motivational considerations in physical activity involvement. Phys Ther 1990;70:808-19.
12. Bandura A. Self-efficacy mechanism in physiological activation and health-promoting behaviour. In: Madden J, editors. Neurobiology of learning, emotion and affect. New York: Raven Press; 1991.
13. Gard G, Sandberg AC. Motivating factors for return to work. Physiother Res Int 1998; 3:100-8.
14. Berglind H, Gerner U. Motivation and return to work among the long-term sick listed: an action theory perspective. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:719-26.
15. Siegert RJ, Taylor WJ. Theoretical aspects of goal-setting and motivation in rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil 2004;26:1-8.
16. Gruninger UJ. Patient education: an example of one-to-one communication. J Hum Hypertens 1995;9:15-25.
17. Gard G, Söderberg S. How can a rehabilitation process be improved-a qualitative study from the perspective of social insurance officers. Disabil Rehabil 2004;26:299-305.
18. Marnetoft SU. Vocational rehabilitation of unemployed sick-listed people in a Swedish rural area. PhD thesis, Department of Public Health, Stockholm, Sweden, 2000.
19. Larsson A, Gard G. How can the rehabilitation planning process at the workplace be improved? A qualitative study from employer's perspective. J Occup Rehabil 2003;13:159-67.
20. Geelen RJGM, Soons PHGM. Rehabilitation: an everyday motivation model. Patient Educ Couns 1996;28:69-77.
21. Andersson SI. Appraisal, coping, motivational factors and gender in vocational rehabilitation. Scand J Soc Med 1996;24:161-8.
22. Thulesius H, Grahn B. Reincentivizing-a new theory on work and work absence. BMC Health Serv Res 2007;7:100.
23. Gard G, Rivano M, Grahn B. Development and reliability of the Motivation for Change Questionnaire. Disabil Rehabil 2005;27:967-76.
24. Grahn B, Stigmar K, Ekdahl C. Motivation for change and personal resources in patients with prolonged musculoskeletal disorders. J Bodywork Movement Ther 2001;5:160-72.
25. Meichenbaum DC, Fitzpatrick D. A constructivist narrative perspective on stress and coping stress inoculation applications. In: Gokldberger L, Breznitz S, editors. Handbook of stress: theoretical and clinical aspects. 2nd ed. New York: Free Press; 1992. p. 706-23.
26. Neymeyer RA. Constructivist approaches to the measurement of meaning. In: Neymeyer GJ, editors. Constructivist assessment: a casebook. Newbury Park: Sage; 1993. p. 1-30.
27. Hair J, Anderson R, Tatham R, Black W. Multivariate data analysis. New Jersey: Prentice Hall; 1998.
28. Altman D. Practical statistics for medical research. London: Chapman & Hall; 1996.
29. Lindström K, Dallner M, Elo A-L, Gamberale F, Knardahl S, Skogstad A, Örhede E. QPS Nordic. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers; 1997.
30. Dallner M, Elo A-L, Gamberale F, Hottinen V, Knardahl S, Lindström K, Skogstad A, Örhede E. Validation of the General Nordic Questionnaire for psychological and social factors at work. Nord 2000:12. Copenhagen: Nordic Council of Ministers; 2000.
31. Eriksson M, Lindström B. Validity of Antonovsky's sense of coherence scale: a systematic review. J Epidemiol Community Health 2005;59:460-6.
32. Roos EM, Klässbo M, Lohmander LS. WOMAC Osteoarthritis Index. Reliability, validity and responsiveness in patients with arthroscopically assessed osteoarthritis. Scand J Rheumatol 1999;28:210-5.
33. Swedish Social Insurance Agency 2006: 6. The swedish social insurance agency and vocational rehabilitation - regulations in practice. Stockholm, Sweden, 2006 (In Swedish).
34. Bellamy N. Musculosceletal clinical metrology. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic Publishers Group; 1993.
35. Streiner DL, Norman GR. Health measurement scales. a practical guide to their development and use. New York, Oxford University Press; 1995.
36. Stucki G, Liang MH, Phillips C, Katz JN. The short form-36 is preferable to the SIP as a generic healt status measurement in patients undergoing elective total hip arthoplasty. Arthritis Care Res 1995;8:174-81.