Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The ONWARDS insulin icodec trials

A round-up of the ONWARDS phase 3 clinical trials evaluating the novel weekly insulin icodec in people with diabetes.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Public Health
Published in: BMC Public Health 1/2022

Open Access 01-12-2022 | Vaccination | Research

Development and validation of a multi-lingual online questionnaire for surveying the COVID-19 prevention and control measures used in global workplaces

Authors: Carolyn Ingram, Yanbing Chen, Conor Buggy, Vicky Downey, Mary Archibald, Natalia Rachwal, Mark Roe, Anne Drummond, Carla Perrotta

Published in: BMC Public Health | Issue 1/2022

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Despite widespread COVID-19 vaccination programs, there is an ongoing need for targeted disease prevention and control efforts in high-risk occupational settings. This study aimed to develop, pilot, and validate an instrument for surveying occupational COVID-19 infection prevention and control (IPC) measures available to workers in diverse geographic and occupational settings.

Methods

A 44-item online survey was developed in English and validated for face and content validity according to literature review, expert consultation, and pre-testing. The survey was translated and piloted with 890 workers from diverse industries in Canada, Ireland, Argentina, Poland, Nigeria, China, the US, and the UK. Odds ratios generated from univariable, and multivariable logistic regression assessed differences in ‘feeling protected at work’ according to gender, age, occupation, country of residence, professional role, and vaccination status. Exploratory factor analysis (EFA) was conducted, and internal consistency reliability verified with Cronbach’s alpha. Hypothesis testing using two-sample t-tests verified construct validity (i.e., discriminant validity, known-groups technique), and criterion validity.

Results

After adjustment for occupational sector, characteristics associated with feeling protected at work included being male (AOR = 1.88; 95% CI = 1.18,2.99), being over 55 (AOR = 2.17; 95% CI = 1.25,3.77) and working in a managerial position (AOR = 3.1; 95% CI = 1.99,4.83). EFA revealed nine key IPC domains relating to: environmental adjustments, testing and surveillance, education, costs incurred, restricted movements, physical distancing, masking, isolation strategies, and areas for improvement. Each domain showed sufficient internal consistency reliability (Cronbach’s alpha ≥0.60). Hypothesis testing revealed differences in survey responses by country and occupational sector, confirming construct validity (p < 0.001), criterion validity (p = 0.04), and discriminant validity (p < 0.001).

Conclusions

The online survey, developed in English to identify the COVID-19 protective measures used in diverse workplace settings, showed strong face validity, content validity, internal consistency, criterion validity, and construct validity. Translations in Chinese, Spanish, French, Polish, and Hindi demonstrated adaptability of the survey for use in international working environments. The multi-lingual tool can be used by decision makers in the distribution of IPC resources, and to guide occupational safety and health (OSH) recommendations for preventing COVID-19 and future infectious disease outbreaks.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Bi Q, Wu Y, Mei S, Ye C, Zou X, Zhang Z, et al. Epidemiology and transmission of COVID-19 in 391 cases and 1286 of their close contacts in Shenzhen, China: a retrospective cohort study. Lancet Infect Dis. 2020;20(8):911–9.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
2.
Morawska L, Milton DK. It is time to address airborne transmission of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). Clin Infect Dis. 2020;71(9):2311–3.PubMed
3.
Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA). Guidance on preparing workplaces for COVID-19. Washington D.C: OSHA; 2020.
4.
5.
Greenhalgh T, Jimenez JL, Prather KA, Tufekci Z, Fisman D, Schooley R. Ten scientific reasons in support of airborne transmission of SARS-CoV-2. Lancet. 2021;397(10285):1603–5.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
6.
Ingram C, Downey V, Roe M, Chen Y, Archibald M, Kallas K-A, et al. COVID-19 prevention and control measures in workplace settings: a rapid review and meta-analysis. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2021;18(15):7847.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
7.
Dehghani F, Omidi F, Yousefinejad S, Taheri E. The hierarchy of preventive measures to protect workers against the COVID-19 pandemic: a review. Work. 2020;67(4):771–7.PubMed
8.
Hanke W, Pietrzak P. Biological security of the SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection in large workplaces outside the healthcare sector – an epidemiologist’s point of view. Med Pr. 2021;72(1):89–97.PubMed
9.
International Labor Organization (ILO). Protecting the life and health of workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: overview of national legislative and policy responses. Geneva: ILO; 2021.
10.
European Centre for Disease Prevention and Control. Rapid risk assessment: COVID-19 outbreaks in long-term care facilities in the EU/EEA in the context of current vaccination coverage, 26 July 2021. Stockholm: ECDC; 2021.
11.
12.
13.
OSHA. Subpart U—COVID-19 healthcare ETS [internet]. Subpart U—COVID-19 healthcare emergency temporary standard. Washington, D.C.: OSHA; 2021.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
Semple S, Cherrie JW. Covid-19: protecting worker health. Ann Work Expo Health. 2020;64(5):461–4.PubMedCrossRef
21.
Spinazzè A, Cattaneo A, Cavallo DM. COVID-19 outbreak in Italy: protecting worker health and the response of the Italian industrial hygienists association. Ann Work Expo Health. 2020;64(6):559–64.PubMedCrossRef
22.
23.
24.
Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB. Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine. 2000;25(24):3186–91.PubMedCrossRef
25.
Taylor RM, Crichton N, Moult B, Gibson F. A prospective observational study of machine translation software to overcome the challenge of including ethnic diversity in healthcare research. Nurs Open. 2015;2(1):14–23.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
26.
27.
McRobert CJ, Hill JC, Smale T, Hay EM, Van der Windt DA. A multi-modal recruitment strategy using social media and internet-mediated methods to recruit a multidisciplinary, international sample of clinicians to an online research study. PLoS One. 2018;13(7):e0200184.
28.
29.
Wejnert C, Heckathorn DD. Web-based network sampling: efficiency and efficacy of respondent-driven sampling for online research. Sociol Methods Res. 2008;37(1):105–34.CrossRef
30.
Hlatshwako TG, Shah SJ, Kosana P, Adebayo E, Hendriks J, Larsson EC, et al. Online health survey research during COVID-19. Lancet Digit Health. 2021;3(2):e76–7.PubMedCrossRef
31.
Alessi E. Conducting an internet-based survey: benefits, pitfalls, and lessons learned. Soc Work Res. 2010;34:122–8.CrossRef
32.
de Souza AC, Alexandre NMC, de Brito Guirardello E. Psychometric properties in instruments evaluation of reliability and validity. Epidemiol E Serviços Saúde. 2017;26:649–59.CrossRef
33.
Baglin J. Improving your exploratory factor analysis for ordinal data: a demonstration using FACTOR. PARE. 2014;19(5):1–15.
34.
Timmerman ME, Lorenzo-Seva U. Dimensionality assessment of ordered polytomous items with parallel analysis. Psychol Methods. 2011;16(2):209–20.PubMedCrossRef
35.
Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS, Ullman JB. Using multivariate statistics. New York: Pearson; 2019.
36.
Streiner DL. Starting at the beginning: an introduction to coefficient alpha and internal consistency. J Pers Assess. 2003;80(1):99–103.PubMedCrossRef
37.
Ursachi G, Horodnic IA, Zait A. How reliable are measurement scales? External factors with indirect influence on reliability estimators. Procedia Econ Finance. 2015;20:679–86.CrossRef
38.
Watkins C, Daniels L, Jack C, Dickinson H, van den Broek M. Accuracy of a single question in screening for depression in a cohort of patients after stroke: comparative study. BMJ. 2001;323(7322):1159.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
39.
Polit DF. Assessing measurement in health: beyond reliability and validity. Int J Nurs Stud. 2015;52(11):1746–53.PubMedCrossRef
40.
World Health Organization, ILO. Policy brief: preventing and mitigating COVID-19 at work. Geneva: WHO, ILO; 2021.
41.
Department of Health and Human Services. Strategies to reduce COVID-19 transmission at the Smithfield Sioux Falls pork plant. Sioux Falls: CDC; 2020.
42.
Silverberg SL, Puchalski Ritchie LM, Gobat N, Murthy S. COVID-19 infection prevention and control procedures and institutional trust: perceptions of Canadian intensive care and emergency department nurses. Can J Anesth Can Anesth. 2021;68(8):1165–75.CrossRef
43.
44.
45.
46.
47.
MacDonald NE. Vaccine hesitancy: definition, scope and determinants. Vaccine. 2015;33(34):4161–4.PubMedCrossRef
48.
Dzieciolowska S, Hamel D, Gadio S, Dionne M, Gagnon D, Robitaille L, et al. Covid-19 vaccine acceptance, hesitancy, and refusal among Canadian healthcare workers: a multicenter survey. Am J Infect Control. 2021;49(9):1152–7.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
49.
Murphy J, Vallières F, Bentall RP, Shevlin M, McBride O, Hartman TK, et al. Psychological characteristics associated with COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy and resistance in Ireland and the United Kingdom. Nat Commun. 2021;12(1):29.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
50.
Ruijs WLM, Hautvast JLA, Kerrar S, van der Velden K, Hulscher MEJL. The role of religious leaders in promoting acceptance of vaccination within a minority group: a qualitative study. BMC Public Health. 2013;13:511.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
51.
Thornton L, Batterham PJ, Fassnacht DB, Kay-Lambkin F, Calear AL, Hunt S. Recruiting for health, medical or psychosocial research using Facebook: systematic review. Internet Interv. 2016;4:72–81.PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRef
52.
Davies B, Kotter M. Lessons from recruitment to an internet-based survey for degenerative cervical myelopathy: comparison of free and fee-based methods. JMIR Res Protoc. 2018;7(2):e6567.CrossRef
Metadata
Title
Development and validation of a multi-lingual online questionnaire for surveying the COVID-19 prevention and control measures used in global workplaces
Authors
Carolyn Ingram
Yanbing Chen
Conor Buggy
Vicky Downey
Mary Archibald
Natalia Rachwal
Mark Roe
Anne Drummond
Carla Perrotta
Publication date
01-12-2022
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Public Health / Issue 1/2022
Electronic ISSN: 1471-2458
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-022-12500-w

Other articles of this Issue 1/2022

BMC Public Health 1/2022 Go to the issue

Research

What do adults want in parks? A qualitative study using walk-along interviews

Research

Urban-rural differences in China’s crude death rate changes

Research

The role of community factors in predicting depressive symptoms among Chinese workforce: a longitudinal study in rural and urban settings

Research

A study of SARS-COV-2 outbreaks in US federal prisons: the linkage between staff, incarcerated populations, and community transmission

Research in practice

Tracking the impacts of climate change on human health via indicators: lessons from the Lancet Countdown

Research

A qualitative study on the perspectives of Turkish mothers and grandmothers in the Netherlands regarding the influence of grandmothers on health related practices in the first 1000 days of a child’s life