Is a structured work task application for the assessment of work performance in a constructed environment, useful for patients with attention deficits?

Figures & data

Table 1. Work skills assessed in the AWP (n = 14).

Motor skills
Posture	Ability to stabilize and position oneself in relation to environment and task
Mobility	Ability to move the body and body parts in relation to the environment
Coordination	Ability to coordinate body parts movements with each other and the environment
Strength	Ability to use strength/handle objects in an appropriate manner
Physical Energy	Ability to perform and complete a work task within a reasonable time and without becoming physically exhausted
Process skills
Mental Energy	Ability to perform and complete the work with maintained attention and without becoming fatigued
Knowledge	Ability to acquire, learn and use knowledge and tools and perform a work task according to aim and goal
Temporal Organization	Ability to initiate, continue, finish and perform task moments in a logical sequence
Organization of Space and Objects	Ability to organize workspace and tools
Adaptation	Ability to note/react, adjust behavior and adapt the environment as a reaction to perceptual or environmental performance cues
Communication and Interaction Skills
Physicality	Ability to physically communicate and interact with other people
Language	Ability to use language for communication and interaction
Relations	Ability to provide communication and social fellowship with other persons
Information Exchange	Ability to exchange information with others

Table 2. Main demographic and clinical characteristics of the study participants.

	Patient group	Comparison group
Participants (n)	65	47
Sex (n:F/M)	36/29	31/16
Mean age (range) (years)	42.7 (24–60)	47.7 (22–60)
Diagnosis (TBI/Stroke)	15/50
Occupation ISCO-08 (n)
1. Managers	6
2. Professionals	20	32
3. Technicians and Associate Professionals	14	11
4. Clerical Support Workers	2
5. Services and Sales Workers	8	1
6. Skilled Agricultural, Forestry, Fishery Workers		1
7. Craft and Related Trades Workers	5	1
8. Plant and Machine Operators and Assemblers	1
9. Elementary Occupations	9	1

Occupation is classified using International Standard Classification of Occupations (ISCO-08); Major Groups.

Figure 1. The flow chart of the developmental process of the AdRT.

Table 3. Result of evaluation of the AdRT using the Assessment of Work Characteristics.

Assessment of Work Characteristics Domains	Skills	Assessment of Work Characteristics rating level
Motor skills	Posture	3
	Mobility	2
	Coordination	4
	Strength and handling of object	3
	Physical energy	2
Process skills	Mental energy	4
	Knowledge	4
	Temporal organization	4
	Organization of workplace	2
	Adaptation	4
Communication and	Physical communication and interaction	1
interaction skills	Language	1
	Social contact	1
	Information exchange	1

Level of skills needed to efficient and effective perform the AdRT. Assessment of Work Characteristics rating levels: 1 = never needed, 2 = occasionally needed, 3= frequently needed, 4= always needed.

Table 4. Reference data for the CG (n = 47): Performance time and types of errors when performing the AdRT.

			95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
	Mean	Median	Lower	Upper	IQR
Performance time (min)*	42.7	42	39.5	45.9	34–50
Performance time per reg (sec)**	69	68	63.83	74.17	55–81
Total numbers of errors***	6	4	4.46	7.54	2–9

*Total time in minutes needed to complete the task.

**Time in seconds needed to complete one nameplate registration.

***Total numbers of errors consist of primary errors (factual inaccuracies that cannot be traced back to earlier incorrectly inserted information), secondary errors (inaccuracies made because of a previously performed primary error) and format errors (the criteria given in the instruction are not followed consistently).

Table 5. Benchmarks for assessing the AdRT with the AWP assessment levels based on the performance of the healthy CG.

AWP Assessment Levels*	Performance time	Total numbers of error
4	≤42	0–4
3–2	43–50	5–9
1	>51	>10

*1 = deficient performance, 2 = inefficient performance, 3 = uncertain performance and 4 = competent performance.

Table 6. Comparison of performance during 60 min on the AdRT between CG and PG for performance time, the total number of registrations and errors.

				95% Confidence Interval of the Difference
	n	Mean	Median	Lower	Upper	IQR
Total performance time in minutes
CG	47	42.2	42.0	8.4	15.9	34.0–50.0
PG	60	54.4	60.0			50.5–60.0
Average performance time per reg^a
CG	47	69.2	68.4	42.4	99.1	55.2–81.0
PG	64	140	100.2			84.3–153.3
Total number of registrations
CG	47	36.6	37.0	−7.4	3.2	37.0–37.0
PG	60	31.4	36.5			24.5–37.0
Total number of errors
CG	47	5.9	4.0	3.2	8.9	2.0–9.0
PG	60	12.0	10.0			5.0–16.5
Average number of errors per reg^b
CG	47	0.2	0.1	0.1	0.5	0.1–0.2
PG	64	0.5	0.3			0.1–0.6

All comparisons were significant on p < 0.001 level.

^aAverage time in seconds needed to complete one nameplate registration.

^bAverage number of errors per completed registration despite the type of error.

Table 7. Comparison between PG and CG on performance on AWP subscales motor and process skills, showing median values, interquartile range (IQR), and effect size.

AWP Motor and Process Skills	n	Mean	Median	IQR		Exact Sig. (2-taled)	Effect Size (η^2)
Posture
CG	47	4.0	4	4	4	0.019	0.01
PG	63	4.0	4	4	4
Coordination
CG	47	4.0	4	4	4	<0.001	0.09
PG	63	3.4	4	3	4
Strength and Effort
CG	47	4.0	4	4	4	0.049	0.01
PG	63	3.9	4	4	4
Energy (Motor)
CG	47	4.0	4	4	4	<0.001	0.08
PG	63	3.4	4	3	4
Energy (Process)
CG	47	3.2	3	3	4	<0.001	0.34
PG	63	1.8	1	1	3
Knowledge
CG	47	2.5	2	1	4	<0.001	0.16
PG	63	1.3	1	1	1
Temporal Organization
CG	47	3.9	4	4	4	<0.001	0.24
PG	63	2.8	3	2	4
Organizing Space and Object
CG	47	4.0	4	4	4	0.002	0.02
PG	63	3.8	4	4	4
Adaptation
CG	47	3.1	3	2	4	<0.001	0.21
PG	63	1.9	1	1	3

Figure 2. Sensitivity and Specificity for the AdRT assessed with the AWP Motor and Process Skills (A) Sensitivity and Specificity using the AWP Process and Motor Skills, (B) Sensitivity and Specificity using the AWP Process Skills.