• Prehosp Emerg Care · Feb 2018

    Review

    Reliability and Validity of Survey Instruments to Measure Work-Related Fatigue in the Emergency Medical Services Setting: A Systematic Review.

    • P Daniel Patterson, Matthew D Weaver, Anthony Fabio, Ellen M Teasley, Megan L Renn, Brett R Curtis, Margaret E Matthews, Andrew J Kroemer, Xiaoshuang Xun, Zhadyra Bizhanova, Patricia M Weiss, Denisse J Sequeira, Patrick J Coppler, Eddy S Lang, and J Stephen Higgins.
    • Prehosp Emerg Care. 2018 Feb 15; 22 (sup1): 17-27.

    BackgroundThis study sought to systematically search the literature to identify reliable and valid survey instruments for fatigue measurement in the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) occupational setting.MethodsA systematic review study design was used and searched six databases, including one website. The research question guiding the search was developed a priori and registered with the PROSPERO database of systematic reviews: "Are there reliable and valid instruments for measuring fatigue among EMS personnel?" (2016:CRD42016040097). The primary outcome of interest was criterion-related validity. Important outcomes of interest included reliability (e.g., internal consistency), and indicators of sensitivity and specificity. Members of the research team independently screened records from the databases. Full-text articles were evaluated by adapting the Bolster and Rourke system for categorizing findings of systematic reviews, and the rated data abstracted from the body of literature as favorable, unfavorable, mixed/inconclusive, or no impact. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology was used to evaluate the quality of evidence.ResultsThe search strategy yielded 1,257 unique records. Thirty-four unique experimental and non-experimental studies were determined relevant following full-text review. Nineteen studies reported on the reliability and/or validity of ten different fatigue survey instruments. Eighteen different studies evaluated the reliability and/or validity of four different sleepiness survey instruments. None of the retained studies reported sensitivity or specificity. Evidence quality was rated as very low across all outcomes.ConclusionsIn this systematic review, limited evidence of the reliability and validity of 14 different survey instruments to assess the fatigue and/or sleepiness status of EMS personnel and related shift worker groups was identified.

      Pubmed     Copy Citation     Plaintext  

      Add institutional full text...

    Notes

     
    Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?
    300 characters remaining
    help        
    You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
    • Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as *italics*, _underline_ or **bold**.
    • Superscript can be denoted by <sup>text</sup> and subscript <sub>text</sub>.
    • Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines 1. 2. 3., hyphens - or asterisks *.
    • Links can be included with: [my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
    • Images can be included with: ![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
    • For footnotes use [^1](This is a footnote.) inline.
    • Or use an inline reference [^1] to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document [^1]: This is a long footnote..

    hide…