The ICF-based Demand and Ability Protocol (DAP) is a dialogue tool to be used when assessing the balance between an employee's functional ability and the demands of their work and as a supportive measure for discussing work ability, workplace adaptations and return to work. The DAP has been used in Sweden since the twenty-first century, however revision nor content validity has not yet been evaluated.
Objective:
To update and revise the Demand and Ability Protocol and to assess the content validity of the dialogue tool.
Methods:
A qualitative design was used involving a multidisciplinary expert panel (n = 7) and a group of experienced DAP-users (n = 13) who participated in think-aloud interviews. Data were analyzed with thematic analysis.
Results:
Several significant changes were made to the domains to enhance the clarity and conciseness of the DAP. Some changes in formulations were identified and changed, even though the questions were mostly perceived as clear and relevant. Overall, the DAP can be considered as a dialogue tool with good content validity.
Conclusion:
The revision and validation process of the DAP have clarified the theoretical concepts and their link to the ICF, establishing a strong basis for the dialogue tool's content.
TenglandPA. The concept of work ability. J Occup Rehabil2011; 21: 275–285.
2.
Juhani I and Suvi L, eds. Past, Present, and Future of Work Ability: Proceedings of the 1st International Symposium on Work Ability, 5-6 September 2001, Tampere, Finland. Helsinki: Finnish Institute of Occupational Health.; 2004.
3.
IlmarinenJGouldRJärvikoskiA,et al.Diversity of Work Ability. 2008, p. 13–24.
4.
PrümperJRichenhagenG. Von der Arbeitsunfähigkeit zum Haus der Arbeitsfähigkeit. Der Work Ability Index und seine Anwendung2011: 135–146.
5.
IlmarinenJ. Work ability–a comprehensive concept for occupational health research and prevention. Scand J Work Environ Health2009; 35: –5.
6.
HøgelundJHolmA. Worker adaptation and workplace accommodations after the onset of an illness. IZA Journal of Labor Policy2014; 3: 17.
7.
LancmanSBarrosoBIL. Mental health: professional rehabilitation and the return to work - A systematic review. Work2021; 69: 439–448.
8.
European Commission D-GfE, Social Affairs and Inclusion EU strategic framework on health and safety at work 2021-2027 Occupational safety and health in a changing world of work. In: Commission E, editor. COM/2021/323 final. Brussels: European Commission; 2021.
KlevangerNEAasdahlLBy RiseM. Work as an arena for health-Supervisors’ experiences with attending to employees’ sick leave and return-to-work process. PLoS One2023; 18: e0284369.
11.
CravenKDe Dios PérezBHolmesJ, et al.Factors influencing employers’ support for employees with acquired brain injuries or mental illness to return to- and stay in work: a qualitative systematic review. Work2024; 79: 93–121.
12.
MattessichPWJohnsonKM. Collaboration: What Makes It Work. Nashville, Tennesee, USA: Fieldstone Alliance, 2018.
13.
CorbièreMMazanielloMBastienM-F, et al.Stakeholders’ role and actions in the return-to-work process of workers on sick-leave due to common mental disorders: a scoping review. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation2020; 30: 1–39.
14.
HonkonenNLamminpääALiiraJ. Work ability meetings - Challenges and Resolutions, a survey to Finnish occupational physicians. Work2024; 79: 1425–1432.
15.
VilsterenMvan OostromSDe VetH, et al.Workplace interventions to prevent work disability in workers on sick leave. The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews2015; 10: CD006955.
16.
EskilssonTLehtiASturessonM,et al.Metodstöd ADA+: ArbetsplatsDialog för Arbetsåtergång : planering, uppföljning och stöd. Umeå: Umeå universitet, 2017.
17.
AxénIBrämbergEVaezM, et al.Interventions for common mental disorders in the occupational health service: a systematic review with a narrative synthesis. International Archives of Occupational and Environmental Health2020; 93: 823–838.
18.
BouffardJDurandM-JCoutuM-F. Adaptation of a Guide to Equip Employers to Manage the Gradual Return to Work of Individuals with a Musculoskeletal Disorder. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation2019; 29: 625–635.
19.
LiedbergGMBjörkMCoutuMF, et al.Translation and initial cross-cultural adaptation of the tool for support-gradual return-to-work for persons with chronic musculoskeletal pain to the Swedish setting. Work2024; 79: 987–998
20.
EskilssonTNorlundSLehtiA,et al.Enhanced Capacity to Act: Managers’ Perspectives When Participating in a Dialogue-Based Workplace Intervention for Employee Return to Work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation2021; 31: 263–274.
21.
StrömbäckMFjellman WiklundAKeisuS, et al.Restoring confidence in return to work: a qualitative study of the experiences of persons with exhaustion disorder after a dialogue-based workplace intervention. PLOS ONE2020; 15: e0234897.
22.
KarlsonBJönssonPPålssonB, et al.Return to work after a workplace-oriented intervention for patients on sick-leave for burnout–a prospective controlled study. BMC Public Health2010; 10: 01.
23.
Keus van de PollMNyberghLLornuddC, et al.Preventing sickness absence among employees with common mental disorders or stress-related symptoms at work: a cluster randomised controlled trial of a problem-solving-based intervention conducted by the occupational health services. Occup Environ Med2020; 77: 454–461.
24.
Marijke EngbersPF. Funksjonsvurdering pa arbeidsplassen, et hjelpemiddel ved spesialvurdering i regi av bedriftshelsetjenesten. In: Test av Krav og Funksjonsskjema i Praxis; Slutrapport till NHO Arbeitsmiljofondet Projekt S 2387; NHO: Oslo, Sweden, 2006. Norway: NHO Arbeitsmiljofondet, 2006.
25.
AiliKSvartengrenMKatarinaD, et al.Active engagement of managers in employee RTW and manager-employee relationship: managers’ experiences of participating in a dialogue using the demand and ability protocol. Disability and Rehabilitation2022; 45: 1–10.
26.
JohanssonESvartengrenMDanielssonK,et al.How to strengthen the RTW process and collaboration between patients with chronic pain and their employers in interdisciplinary pain rehabilitation programs? Patients’ experiences of the demand and ability protocol. Disability and Rehabilitation2023; 45: 2013–2020.
27.
World Health O. International classification of functioning, disability and health: ICF. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.
28.
WHO. How to use the ICF - A practical manual for using the international classification of functioning, disability and health (ICF). In: TEAM W (eds) Classifications and terminologies (CAT). 1 ed. Geneva, Switzerland: World Health Organization, 2013, pp.122.
29.
DeVonHABlockMEMoyle-WrightP, et al.A psychometric toolbox for testing validity and reliability. J Nurs Scholarsh2007; 39: 155–164.
30.
PolitDFBeckCT. Nursing research: generating and assessing evidence for nursing practice. 2012.
31.
DavisLL. Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Applied Nursing Research1992; 5: 194–197.
32.
LecoursABeaulieuA-APoulinV, et al.Development of a questionnaire measuring preventive behaviors at work. Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation2021; 31: 570–580.
33.
GrantJSDavisLL. Selection and use of content experts for instrument development. Res Nurs Health1997; 20: 269–274.
34.
WolcottMDLobczowskiNG. Using cognitive interviews and think-aloud protocols to understand thought processes. Curr Pharm Teach Learn2021; 13: 181–188.
35.
AlhejailiAWharradHWindleR. A pilot study conducting online think aloud qualitative method during social distancing: benefits and challenges. Healthcare2022; 10: 1700.
36.
BraunVClarkeV. Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology2006; 3: 77–101.
37.
BergströmGBjörk BrämbergEArapovic-JohanssonB,et al.Problemlösning i arbetslivet: samtal för bättre psykisk hälsa. Upplaga 1 ed. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2021.
38.
WatzlawickPBeavinJHJacksonDD. Pragmatics of human communication : a study of interactional patterns, pathologies, and paradoxes. 2. pr. ed. New York, USA: WW Norton, 1967.
39.
ThistedCNLabriolaMNielsenCV, et al.Understanding depression as a workplace issue: clarifying employers’ attitudes to manage employees with depression. Work2020; 65: 857–868.
40.
EngquistA. Samtalsmetodik för alla professioner. 1. uppl. ed. Lund: Studentlitteratur, 2015.
41.
DurandMJCorbièreMCoutuMF, et al.A review of best work-absence management and return-to-work practices for workers with musculoskeletal or common mental disorders. Work. 2014; 48: 579–589.
42.
KalskiLVölkelLHäußlerS,et al.Efficacy of occupational rehabilitation in return to work for back pain: a systematic literature review. Work2024; 78: 29–43.
43.
de WeerdBJvan DijkMKvan der LindenJN, et al.The effectiveness of a convergence dialogue meeting with the employer in promoting return to work as part of the cognitive-behavioural treatment of common mental disorders: a randomized controlled trial. Work2016; 54: 647–655.
44.
AlmanasrehEMolesRChenTF. Evaluation of methods used for estimating content validity. Res Social Adm Pharm2019; 15: 214–221.
45.
VahidZMaryamRAbbasA, et al.Details of content validity and objectifying it in instrument development. Nursing Practice Today2015; 1: 163–171.
46.
YilmazK. Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European Journal of Education2013; 48: 311–325.
47.
MacDermidJC. ICF Linking and Cognitive Interviewing Are Complementary Methods for Optimizing Content Validity of Outcome Measures: An Integrated Methods Review. Frontiers in Rehabilitation Sciences2021; 22: 1–15.
48.
PolitDFBeckCT. Generalization in quantitative and qualitative research: myths and strategies. Int J Nurs Stud2010; 47: 1451–1458.
49.
PattonMQ. Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods: Integrating Theory and Practice. Saint Paul, MN, USA: Sage Publications, 2014.
50.
Tuval-MashiachR. Raising the curtain: the importance of transparency in qualitative research. Qualitative Psychology2017; 4: 126–138.
51.
HenninkMKaiserBN. Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: a systematic review of empirical tests. Soc Sci Med2022; 292: 114523.
