Translation and Psychometric Testing of the Hägerbäumer Presenteeism Scale in English

Christoph Golz; G Kilcher; M Gerlach; M Hägerbäumer; K A Peter; E Blozik

doi:10.1007/s10926-024-10174-2

Translation and Psychometric Testing of the Hägerbäumer Presenteeism Scale in English

J Occup Rehabil. 2024 Mar 11. doi: 10.1007/s10926-024-10174-2. Online ahead of print.

Authors

Christoph Golz¹, G Kilcher², M Gerlach³, M Hägerbäumer⁴, K A Peter³, E Blozik^{2

5}

Affiliations

¹ Department of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland. christoph.golz@bfh.ch.
² Department of Health Services Research, SWICA Healthcare Organisation, Winterthur, Switzerland.
³ Department of Health Professions, Bern University of Applied Sciences, Bern, Switzerland.
⁴ Department of Psychology, EURO-FH University of Applied Sciences, Hamburg, Germany.
⁵ Institute of Primary Care, University and University Hospital of Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland.

PMID: 38466556
DOI: 10.1007/s10926-024-10174-2

Abstract

Purpose: Interest in presenteeism has increased in research. Presenteeism is a behaviour of going to work despite illness. It has been predominantly measured using single items, which introduce limitations to validity. To overcome these limitations, Hägerbäumer developed a German multi-item presenteeism scale.

Methods: The aim of the study was to provide an English translation and psychometric testing of the scale. This was conducted in two phases with native English-speaking employed adults. Phase 1 includes translation and cognitive debriefing, phase 2 testing construct validity and internal consistency reliability.

Results: Cognitive debriefing with 10 employees revealed no problems with understanding or answering the translated items. In total, 487 employed adults participated in the study, of which data from 287 were included in the analysis. For structural validity, the goodness-of-fit indicators all reached their thresholds (TLI = 0.98, CFI = 0.99, RMSEA = 0.07, SRMR = 0.02). The scale does not show differences between sexes and age groups but between sectors (F_6,70.95 = 5.53, p < 0.001). The internal consistency reliability was satisfactory with α = 0.89 (CI 95%, 0.87-0.91).

Conclusion: The translated multidimensional scale for measuring presenteeism at the behavioural level demonstrated good psychometric properties in an initial validation. Further psychometric testing is required before using this scale in cross-national comparison in research and international companies.

Keywords: Cognitive debriefing; Presenteeism; Psychometrics; Scale.