Safety and Health at Work

Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute, Korea Occupational Safety and Health Agency (산업안전보건연구원)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Scale Development and Validation to Measure Occupational Health Literacy Among Thai Informal Workers

  • Received : 2019.07.18
  • Accepted : 2020.06.08
  • Published : 2020.12.30
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: The high incidence of work-related diseases and injuries among day-laborers and workers with no legal contracts (informal workers) has received the attention of the Thai authorities. Workers' low occupational health literacy (OHL) has been reasoned as one contributing factor. Absence of a valid tool has prevented assessment of informal workers' OHL. The aim of this study was to create a valid and reliable Occupational Health Literacy Scale within the context of Thai working culture (TOHLS-IF). Methods: This study used the mixed method approach to develop TOHLS-IF. Questions were generated using in-depth interviews and an extensive review of the literature. Experts' assessment confirmed the content validity of TOHLS-IF. The scales of its psychometric properties were assessed in a sample of 400 informal workers using cluster random sampling. Results: The final version of the TOHLS-IF comprises 38 items within 4 dimensions: Ability to Gain Access, Understanding, Evaluation, and Use of occupational health and safety information. Factor analysis identified items explaining 50.22% of the total variance. The final confirmatory analysis confirmed the model estimates were satisfactory for the construct. TOHLS-IF demonstrated a high internal consistency and satisfactory reliability (Cronbach's alpha = .98). Conclusion: The TOHLS-IF is a valid and reliable instrument to assess informal workers' OHL. The structural dimensions of this instrument are based on the concept of health literacy and Thai culture. Thai health professionals are encouraged to benefit from this instrument to assess their workers' OHL and apply findings as guidelines for effective occupational health and safety interventions.

Keywords

Acknowledgement

This research has been supported by Thai Health Promotion Foundation (ThaiHealth). The authors would like to thank all study participants for their cooperation. A special thanks to Dr. Azadeh Stark for technical suggestions and assistance with drafting of this manuscript.

References

  1. World Health Organization (WHO). Health literacy and health behavior. In: Presented at the 7th Global Conference on Health Promotion, Shanghai, China [Internet] 2016 [cited 2019 May 12]. Available from: www.who.int/healthpromotion/conferences/9gchp/health-literacy/en/; 2016.
  2. Sorensen K, Van den Broucke S, Fullam J, et al. Health literacy and public health: a systematic review and integration of definitions and models. BMC Public Health [Internet] 2012:12-80. https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2458-12-80 [cited 2019 May 15]; Available from:.
  3. Nutbeam D. Health literacy as a public health goal: a challenge for contemporary health education and communication strategies into the 21stcentury. Health Promot Int 2000;15:259-67.
  4. Kickbusch IS. Health literacy: addressing the health and education divide. Health Promot Int [Internet] 2001;16(3):289-97 [cited 2019 May 22]; Available from: https://academic.oup.com/heapro/article/16/3/289/653857.
  5. Rauscher KJ, Myers DJ. Socioeconomic disparities in the prevalence of work-related injuries among adolescents in the United States. J Adolesc Health 2008;42(1):50-7.
  6. National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA). Health disparities in manufacturing (Publication no. 2010-146); 2010 [cited 2019 May 15]. Available from: www.cdc.gov/niosh/docs/2010-146/pdfs/2010-146.pdf.
  7. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). Quick guide to health literacy [Internet]. Washington, D.C.: HHS. 2016 [cited 2019, May 14]. Available from: www.health.gov/communication/literacy/quickguide/factsbasic.html.
  8. International Labour Organization (ILO), Informal economy: a hazardous activity. [cited 2019 May 22]. Available from: https://www.ilo.org/safework/areasofwork/hazardous-work/WCMS_110305/lang-en/index.htm.
  9. Rockefeller Foundation. Report. Health vulnerabilities of informal workers [Internet]; 2013 [cited 2019 May 28]. Available from: https://assets.rockefellerfoundation.org/app/uploads/20130528214745/HealthVulnerabilities-of-Informal-Workers.pdf.
  10. National Statistical Office (NSO), Ministry of Digital Economy and Society, Thailand. The informal employment survey; 2018. 131 p (in Thai).
  11. Office of the National Economic and Social Development Council (NESDC), Thailand. A report on social situation and outlook; 2019 [cited 2020 Mar 14]. Available from: https://www.nesdc.go.th/ewt_dl_link.php?nid=5491&filename=socialoutlookreport (in Thai).
  12. Wong BK. Building a health literate workplace. Workplace Health Saf 2012;60(8):363-9 quiz 370.
  13. Kriebel D, Jacobs MM, Markkanen P, Tickner J. Lessons learned: solutions for workplace safety and health. Lowell Center for Sustainable Production at University of Massachusetts Lowell. 2011 [cited 2019 May 22]. Available from: www.sustainableproduction.org/Lessons.php.
  14. Jun-on N. Management of labour in the informal sector in Thailand; 2013 (in Thai). Available from: http://library.senate.go.th/document/Ext5360/5360123_0002.PDF.
  15. Berkman ND, Sheridan SL, Donahue KE, Halpern DJ, Crotty K. Low health literacy and health outcomes: an updated systematic review 2011;155(2):97-107.
  16. Cutilli CC, Bennett IM. Understanding the health literacy of America: results of the national assessment of adult literacy. Orthop Nurs 2009;28(1):27-34.
  17. Sorensen K, et al. Health literacy in Europe: comparative results of the European health literacy survey (HLS-EU). Eur J Public Health 2015;25(6):1053-8.
  18. Roma M, et al. Health Systems Research Institute (HSRI). National health literacy survey 2017, Thailand (Phase 1); 2018 (in Thai). Available from: Report No. hs2438.pdf.
  19. Sabbahi DA, Lawrence HP, Limeback H, Rootman I. Development and evaluation of an oral health literacy instrument for adults. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 2009;37(5):451-62.
  20. Gibbs H, Chapman-Novakofski K. Establishing content validity for the nutrition literacy assessment instrument. Prev Chronic Dis 2013;10:E109.
  21. Azizi N, Karimy M, Abedini R, Armoon B, Montazeri A. Development and validation of the health literacy scale for workers. Int J Occup Environ Med 2019;10(1):30-9.
  22. Yoryuenyong C, Cheryklinput N, Chiangkhong A. Health literacy for occupational diseases prevention among workers in Bangkok Metropolitan: development and validation of health literacy scale. Kuakarun J Nurs 2019;26(2):7-21 (in Thai).
  23. De Vellis RF. Scale development: theory and application. 2nd ed. University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill (USA): SAGE Publications; 2016. 280 p.
  24. Nunnally JC. Psychometric theory. 2nd ed. New York (NY): McGraw-Hill; 1978. 701 p.
  25. Netemeyer RG, Bearden WO, Sharma S. Scaling procedures: issues and applications. California (CA): Sage Publications; 2003. 224 p.
  26. Morgado FFR, Meireles JFF, Neves CM, Amaral ACS, Ferreira MEC. Scale development: ten main limitations and recommendations to improve future research practices. Psicol Reflex E Critia 2018;30:3.
  27. Hinkin TR. A brief tutorial on the development of measures for use in survey questionnaires [Internet]; 1998 [cited 2019 May 18]. Available from: http://scholarship.cornell.edu/articles/521.
  28. Boateng G, Neilands TB, Frongillo EA, Megar-Quinonez HR, Yong SL. Best practice for developing and validating scales for health, social, and behavioral research: a primer. Front Public Health 2018;6:149.
  29. Davis LL. Instrument review: getting the most from a panel of experts. Appl Nurs Res 1992;5(4):194-7.
  30. MacCallum RC, Widaman KF, Preacher KJ, Hong S. Sample size in factor analysis: the role of model error. Multivariate Behav Res 2001;36:611-37.
  31. Osborne JW, Costello AB. Sample size and subject to item ratio in principal components analysis. Pract Assess Res Eval 2004;9(11) (cited 2019 May 22). Available from: http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=9&n=11.
  32. Meade AW, Bauer DJ. Power and precision in confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. Struct Equ Model 2007;14(4):611-35.
  33. Kyriazos TA. Applied psychometrics: sample size and sample power considerations in factor Analysis (EFA, CFA) and SEM in general. Psychology 2018;9:2207-30.
  34. Sombutteera K, Thavornpitak Y. Response rate and factors associating mailed questionnaire: response rate in nursing sciences and public health research. KKU Res J 2015;15(1):105-13 (in Thai).
  35. Polit DF, Beck CT. Essential of nursing research: methods, appraisal, and utilization. 5th ed. Philadelphia (PA): Lippincott Company; 2006. 758 p.
  36. Waltz C, Strickland O, Lenz E. Measurement in nursing and health research. 5th ed. New York (NY): Springer Publishing Company; 2010. 634 p.
  37. Hinkle DE, Jurs SG, Wiersma W. Applied statistics for the behavioral sciences. 2nd ed. Boston (MA): Houghton Mifflin; 1988. 682 p.
  38. Arbuckle J. Amos 17.0 users' guide. Chicago, IL: Amos Development Cooperation; 2010.
  39. Bentler PM, Chou CP. Practical issues in structural modeling. Sociol Methods Res 1987;16(1):78-117.
  40. Cronbach LJ. Coefficient alpha and the internal structure of tests. Psychometrika 1951;16:297-334.
  41. Kaiser HF. An index of factorial simplicity. Psychometrika 1974;39(1). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02291575 (cited 2019 May 30). Available from:.
  42. Bartlett MS. A note on the multiplying factors for various chi square approximation. J R Stac Soc 1954:296-8 (series B).
  43. Bentler PM, Bonett DG. Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychol Bull 1980;88:588-606.
  44. Schreiber JB, Nora A, Stage FK, Barlow EA, King J. Reporting structural equation modeling and confirmatory factor Analysis results: a review. J Educ Res 2006;99:323-38.
  45. Polit DF, Beck CT. The content validity index: are you sure you know what's being reported? Critique and recommendations. Res Nurs Health 2006;29:489-97.
  46. Horn JL. On the internal consistency reliability of factors. Multivariate Behav Res 1969;4:115-25.

Cited by

  1. Work-Related Health Literacy: A Scoping Review to Clarify the Concept vol.18, pp.19, 2021, https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph18199945