Cargando…

Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue

BACKGROUND: Work-related fatigue has a strong impact on performance and safety but so far, no agreed upon method exists to detect and quantify it. It has been suggested that work-related fatigue cannot be quantified with just one test alone, possibly because fatigue is not a uniform construct. The p...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Völker, Ina, Kirchner, Christine, Bock, Otmar L.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute 2016
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4909850/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27340599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.11.003
_version_ 1782437896493465600
author Völker, Ina
Kirchner, Christine
Bock, Otmar L.
author_facet Völker, Ina
Kirchner, Christine
Bock, Otmar L.
author_sort Völker, Ina
collection PubMed
description BACKGROUND: Work-related fatigue has a strong impact on performance and safety but so far, no agreed upon method exists to detect and quantify it. It has been suggested that work-related fatigue cannot be quantified with just one test alone, possibly because fatigue is not a uniform construct. The purpose of this study is therefore to measure work-related fatigue with multiple tests and then to determine the underlying factorial structure. METHODS: Twenty-eight employees (mean: 36.11; standard deviation 13.17) participated in five common fatigue tests, namely, posturography, heart rate variability, distributed attention, simple reaction time, and subjective fatigue before and after work. To evaluate changes from morning to afternoon, t tests were conducted. For further data analysis, the differences between afternoon and morning scores for each outcome measure and participant (Δ scores) were submitted to factor analysis with varimax rotation and each factor with the highest-loading outcome measure was selected. The Δ scores from tests with single and multiple outcome measures were submitted for a further factor analysis with varimax rotation. RESULTS: The statistical analysis of the multiple tests determine a factorial structure with three factors: The first factor is best represented by center of pressure (COP) path length, COP confidence area, and simple reaction time. The second factor is associated with root mean square of successive difference and useful field of view (UFOV). The third factor is represented by the single Δ score of subjective fatigue. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is a multidimensional phenomenon that should be assessed by multiple tests. Based on data structure and practicability, we recommend carrying out further studies to assess work-related fatigue with manual reaction time and UFOV Subtest 2.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-4909850
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2016
publisher Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-49098502016-06-23 Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue Völker, Ina Kirchner, Christine Bock, Otmar L. Saf Health Work Original Article BACKGROUND: Work-related fatigue has a strong impact on performance and safety but so far, no agreed upon method exists to detect and quantify it. It has been suggested that work-related fatigue cannot be quantified with just one test alone, possibly because fatigue is not a uniform construct. The purpose of this study is therefore to measure work-related fatigue with multiple tests and then to determine the underlying factorial structure. METHODS: Twenty-eight employees (mean: 36.11; standard deviation 13.17) participated in five common fatigue tests, namely, posturography, heart rate variability, distributed attention, simple reaction time, and subjective fatigue before and after work. To evaluate changes from morning to afternoon, t tests were conducted. For further data analysis, the differences between afternoon and morning scores for each outcome measure and participant (Δ scores) were submitted to factor analysis with varimax rotation and each factor with the highest-loading outcome measure was selected. The Δ scores from tests with single and multiple outcome measures were submitted for a further factor analysis with varimax rotation. RESULTS: The statistical analysis of the multiple tests determine a factorial structure with three factors: The first factor is best represented by center of pressure (COP) path length, COP confidence area, and simple reaction time. The second factor is associated with root mean square of successive difference and useful field of view (UFOV). The third factor is represented by the single Δ score of subjective fatigue. CONCLUSION: Work-related fatigue is a multidimensional phenomenon that should be assessed by multiple tests. Based on data structure and practicability, we recommend carrying out further studies to assess work-related fatigue with manual reaction time and UFOV Subtest 2. Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute 2016-06 2015-12-01 /pmc/articles/PMC4909850/ /pubmed/27340599 http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.11.003 Text en Copyright © 2015, Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute. Published by Elsevier. http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ This is an open access article under the CC BY-NC-ND license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/).
spellingShingle Original Article
Völker, Ina
Kirchner, Christine
Bock, Otmar L.
Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title_full Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title_fullStr Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title_full_unstemmed Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title_short Relation between Multiple Markers of Work-Related Fatigue
title_sort relation between multiple markers of work-related fatigue
topic Original Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4909850/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27340599
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.shaw.2015.11.003
work_keys_str_mv AT volkerina relationbetweenmultiplemarkersofworkrelatedfatigue
AT kirchnerchristine relationbetweenmultiplemarkersofworkrelatedfatigue
AT bockotmarl relationbetweenmultiplemarkersofworkrelatedfatigue