Search

Introduction: Women generally report more work-related musculoskeletal complaints than men and have higher rates of sickness absence, even within occupations. One likely reason is that work tasks within the occupation are gendered, that is, women and men have different tasks, even when sharing the same job title. Retail is an appealing sector for studying working conditions and work environment in a gender context. The prevalence of work-related complaints is high, physical loads may differ considerably between tasks and the distribution of tasks is likely gendered. The overall aim of this study in retail is to examine factors at the organisational and individual level that may, in a gender perspective, explain working conditions, work tasks, workloads and musculoskeletal health., Methods and Analyses: Data will be collected in two grocery stores, each with 50-70 workers, at two occasions interspersed by about 1 year. In each of these four waves, data collection will include a web-based questionnaire to all workers addressing, for example, work tasks, psychosocial factors, fatigue and pain; semistructured interviews with managers and approximately 10 workers addressing, for example, competences and decision levels; and technical measurements of postures, movements and heart rate in about 30 workers. The study is novel in combining an organisational gender perspective addressed through qualitative methods with a quantitative analysis of tasks, workload and health. The design allows an examination of both how genders may differ, and why they may differ, as well as analyses of the extent to which gendered working conditions change over time in the two participating stores., Ethics and Dissemination: Approval of the study by the Swedish Ethical Review Authority (reference number 2017/404) has been obtained. This work will be disseminated by publication of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals, presentations at scientific conferences and in meetings with representatives from Swedish retail, including unions and employers' organisations., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2020. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.)

Unlabelled: The aim of this study was to translate and cross-culturally adapt the American version of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ) and to test the reliability and validity of the German version (CSQ-D). The CSQ was translated and cross-culturally adapted following international guidelines. Reliability and validity were tested in 62 individuals with chronic musculoskeletal pain syndromes. For the concurrent criterion-related validity the CSQ-D scales were compared with the German Pain Coping Questionnaire (FESV-BW), and for the construct validity with the German Short Form 36 (SF-36). The translation process proceeded without major difficulties. In testing for reliability, the CSQ-D as a whole had a Cronbach's alpha of .94 and an intraclass correlation coefficient of .89 (95% CI .86-.98). The total CSQ-D score was correlated to the FESV-BW scales with scores of r = 0.32-0.55 and with the SF-36 Mental Component Summary with scores of r = 0.32-0.53. The CSQ-D is a precisely translated and highly reliable instrument in the assessment of chronic pain coping strategies. Its concurrent criterion-related validity and construct validity are low. The main reason for the low level of agreement between the CSQ-D and the FESV-BW was revealed by factor analysis., Perspective: This paper presents the German version of the Coping Strategies Questionnaire (CSQ-D) together with the results of clinimetric testing. The CSQ-D is a feasible and reliable outcome measure to be used in trials with German-speaking patients or large multicenter multinational trials to assess pain coping strategies in patients with chronic musculoskeletal pain.