Based on these various conceptions, for the purposes of our study, we consider work functioning as a comprehensive concept, encompassing a wide range of aspects measurable by self-reports. We include aspects of the work process and work outcome (Sonnentag and Frese 2002), as well as aspects of task execution and of organizational functioning, such as behavior within the team and toward the environment of the work organization (Motowidlo and Van Scotter 1994; Viswevaran and Ones 2000). selleck screening library Additionally, the extra effort to complete

work tasks is included where appropriate (Dewa and Lin 2000). Furthermore, in the present study, rather than expressing impairments of work functioning solely in terms of quantity, qualitative aspects of work functioning will be addressed find more as well (Haslam et al. 2005; Suzuki et al. 2004; Yassi and Hancock 2005). Following this description, we assume work functioning to be a multidimensional construct; therefore, no prior limit was set on the number of subscales and items the instrument should contain. Yet, we strive to develop a self-report

questionnaire based on the classical test theory assumptions. In the following, the methods and results of the two research questions will be described separately as part 1 and part 2. Methods Methods part 1: development of the item pool Design In order to develop a sound questionnaire with high content validity, a protocol based on recommendations

by Haynes (Haynes et al. 1995) and by Terwee (Terwee et al. 2007) was followed. The development of the item pool comprised Acesulfame Potassium of three phases: the preparation phase, the item generation phase and the revision phase, is described in detail below. Figure 1 presents an overview of the study design with the methods and results for each step. Fig. 1 Overview of the study design and the results of each step Preparation phase Procedure of the preparation phase: In the first phase, we conducted two systematic literature searches in four databases: PubMed, PsycINFO, Embase, and Cinahl. We aimed to inventory all literature about effects of CMDs on work functioning in general (first search) and nurses and allied health professionals in particular (second search) (Gartner et al. 2010). Subsequently, five focus group interviews were held. Following a multiple category design (Krueger and Casey 2000), three focus groups were held with nurses and allied health professional and two with experts on work functioning in the health sector. The focus group interviews with a duration of 2 hours were conducted by two researchers (FG & KN) who alternately moderated or observed. The group interviews were structured by three cases, which were presented to the participants. The cases, written in the second person, described, respectively, an employee with fatigue and stress, depression and anxiety, and alcohol abuse.