Psychometric Properties of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9) in a Sample of Active Health Care Professionals in Spain

References

• International Labour Organization. La COVID 19 y el mundo del trabajo [COVID-19 and the world of work]. Séptima edición. Estimaciones actualizadas y análisis; 2021. Séptima edición. Estimaciones actualizadas y análisis: https://cutt.ly/4ZseDDq. Accessed March 3, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• World Health Organization. Coronavirus disease (Covid-19) outbreak: rights, roles and responsibilities of health workers, including key considerations for occupational safety and health; 2020. Available from: https://cutt.ly/nmgTIsd. Accessed March 3, 2022.
   Google Scholar
• Pappa S, Ntella V, Giannakas T, et al. Prevalence of depression, anxiety, and insomnia among healthcare workers during the COVID-19 pandemic: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Brain Behav Immun. 2020;88:01–907. doi:10.1016/j.bbi.2020.05.026
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-Iglesias JJ, Gómez-Salgado J, Martín-Pereira J, et al. Impact of SARS-CoV-2 (Covid-19) on the mental health of healthcare professionals: a systematic review. Rev Esp Salud Publica. 2020;94:e202007088.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu J, He W, Zhou K. The mind, the heart, and the leader in times of crisis: how and when COVID-19-triggered mortality salience relates to state anxiety, job engagement, and prosocial behavior. J Appl Psychol. 2020;105(11):1218–1233. doi:10.1037/apl0000620
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Leiter MP, Bakker AB. Work engagement: introduction. In: Bakker B, Leiter P, editors. Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. London: Psychology Press; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Schaufeli WB, Salanova M, González-Romá V, et al. The measurement of engagement and burnout: a two sample confirmatory factor analytic approach. J Happiness Stud. 2002;3(1):71–92. doi:10.1023/A:1015630930326
   Google Scholar
• Schaufeli M, Bakker A. Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Preliminary Manual. Netherlands: Utrecht University; 2003.
   Google Scholar
• Schaufeli M, Bakker A. Defining and measuring work engagement: bringing clarity to the concept. In: Bakker B, Leiter P, editors. Work Engagement: A Handbook of Essential Theory and Research. London: Psychology Press; 2010.
   Google Scholar
• Sinval J, Marques-Pinto A, Queirós C, et al. Work engagement among rescue workers: psychometric properties of the Portuguese UWES. Front Psychol. 2018;8:2229. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.02229
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaufeli WB, Bakker AB, Salanova M. The measurement of work engagement with a short questionnaire: a cross-national study. Educ Psychol Meas. 2006;66:701–716. doi:10.1177/0013164405282471
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hallberg UE, Schaufeli WB. “Same” but different? Can work engagement be discriminated from job involvement and organizational commitment? Eur Psychol. 2006;11(2):119–127. doi:10.1027/1016-9040.11.2.119
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Schaufeli WB, Shimazu A, Hakanen J, et al. An ultra-short measure for work engagement: the UWES-3 validation across five countries. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2017;35(4):1–15.
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Shimazu A, Schaufeli WB, Kosugi S, et al. Work engagement in Japan: validation of the Japanese version of the Utrecht work engagement scale. Appl Psychol. 2008;57(3):510–523. doi:10.1111/j.1464-0597.2008.00333.x
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Klassen RM, Aldhafri S, Mansfield CF, et al. Teacher’ engagement at work: an international validation study. J Exp Educ. 2012;80(4):317–337. doi:10.1080/00220973.2012.678409
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Petrović IB, Vukelić M, Čizmić S. Work engagement in Serbia: psychometric properties of the Serbian version of the Utrecht work engagement scale (UWES). Front Psychol. 2017;8:1799. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2017.01799
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Vallières F, McAuliffe E, Hyland P, et al. Measuring work engagement among community health workers in Sierra Leone: validating the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale. Eur J Work Org. 2017;33(1):41–46.
   Google Scholar
• Tomás JM, de Los Santos S, Georgieva S, et al. Utrecht work engagement scale in Dominican teachers: dimensionality, reliability, and validity. Eur J Work Organ Psychol. 2018;34(2):89–93.
   Google Scholar
• Willmer M, Jacobson JW, Lindberg M. Exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis of the 9-item Utrecht work engagement scale in a multi-occupational female sample: a cross-sectional study. Front Psychol. 2019;10:2771. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.02771
   Google Scholar
• Kulikowski K. One, two or three dimensions of work engagement? Testing the factorial validity of the Utrecht work engagement scale (UWES) on a sample of Polish employees. Int J Occup Saf Ergon. 2019;25:241–249. doi:10.1080/10803548.2017.1371958
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Lovakov A, Agadullina ER, Schaufeli WB. Psychometric properties of the Russian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9). Psychol Russ State Art. 2017;10(1):145–162. doi:10.11621/pir.2017.0111
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gómez-Salgado J, Andrés-Villas M, Domínguez-Salas S, et al. Related health factors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(11):3947. doi:10.3390/ijerph17113947
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Domínguez-Salas S, Gómez-Salgado J, Andrés-Villas M, et al. Psycho-emotional approach to the psychological distress related to the COVID-19 pandemic in Spain: a cross-sectional observational study. Healthcare. 2020;8(3):190. doi:10.3390/healthcare8030190
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Valdez Bonilla H, Ron Murguía C. Escala Utrech de engagement en el trabajo [Utrech Scale of work engagement]. Jalisco: Occupational Health Psychology Unit Utrecht University; 2011.
   Google Scholar
• Antonovsky A. Unraveling the Mystery of Health: How People Manage Stress and Stay Well. San Francisco: Jossey-bass; 1987.
   Google Scholar
• Antonovsky A. The structure and properties of the sense of coherence scale. Soc Sci Med. 1993;36(6):725–733. doi:10.1016/0277-9536(93)90033-Z
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Virués-Ortega J, Martínez-Martín P, Del Barrio JL, et al. Validación transcultural de la Escala de Sentido de Coherencia de Antonovsky (OLQ-13) en ancianos mayores de 70 años [Cross-cultural validation of the Antonovsky Sense of Coherence Scale (OLQ-13) in the ederly over 70.]. Med Clin. 2007;128(13):486–492. doi:10.1157/13100935
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Goldberg DP, Gater R, Sartorius N, et al. The validity of two versions of the GHQ in the WHO study of mental illness in general health care. Psychol Med. 1997;27(1):191–197. doi:10.1017/S0033291796004242
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Del Pilar Sánchez-López M, Dresch V. The 12-Item General Health Questionnaire (GHQ-12): reliability, external validity and factor structure in the Spanish population. Psicothema. 2008;20(4):839–843.
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Idler EL, Benyamini Y. Self-rated health and mortality: a review of twenty-seven community studies. J Health Soc Behav. 1997;38(1):21–37. doi:10.2307/2955359
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Ruiz-Frutos C, Ortega-Moreno M, Allande-Cussó R, et al. Health-related factors of psychological distress during the COVID-19 pandemic among non-health workers in Spain. Saf Sci. 2021;133:104996. doi:10.1016/j.ssci.2020.104996
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Tam CW, Pang EP, Lam LC, et al. Severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) in Hong Kong in 2003: stress and psychological impact among frontline healthcare workers. Psychol Med. 2004;34(7):1197–1204. doi:10.1017/S0033291704002247
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Wang C, Pan R, Wan X, et al. Immediate psychological responses and associated factors during the initial stage of the 2019 coronavirus disease (COVID-19) epidemic among the general population in China. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2020;17(5):1729. doi:10.3390/ijerph17051729
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• McDonald RP, Ho MHR. Principles and practice in reporting structural equation analyses. Psychol Methods. 2002;7(1):64–82. doi:10.1037/1082-989X.7.1.64
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hu LT, Bentler PM. Cutoff criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: conventional criteria versus new alternatives. Struct Equ Modeling. 1999;6(1):1–55. doi:10.1080/10705519909540118
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Putnick DL, Bornstein MH. Measurement invariance conventions and reporting: the state of the art and future directions for psychological research. Dev Rev. 2016;41:71–90. doi:10.1016/j.dr.2016.06.004
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• González A, Padilla JL, Hidalgo MD, et al. EASY-DIF: software for analyzing differential item functioning using the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization procedures. Appl Psychol Meas. 2011;35:483–484. doi:10.1177/0146621610381489
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Socha A, DeMars CE, Zilberberg A, et al. Differential item functioning detection with the Mantel-Haenszel procedure: the effects of matching types and other factors. Int J Test. 2015;15:193–215. doi:10.1080/15305058.2014.984066
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Hernandez-Vargas CI, Llorens-Gumbau S, Rodriguez-Sanchez AM, et al. Validación de la escala UWES-9 en profesionales de la salud en México [Validation of the UWES-9 scale in health professionals in Mexico]. Pensam psicol. 2016;14:89–100. doi:10.11144/Javerianacali.PPSI14-2.veup
   Google Scholar
• Byrne BM. Structural Equation Modelling with AMOS. 2nd ed. New York: Routledge; 2009.
   Google Scholar
• Carmona-Halty MA, Schaufeli WB, Salanova M. The Utrecht Work Engagement Scale for Students (UWES–9S): factorial validity, reliability, and measurement invariance in a Chilean sample of undergraduate university students. Front Psychol. 2019;10(1017):1–5. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2019.01017
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Balducci C, Fraccaroli F, Schaufeli WB. Psychometric properties of the Italian version of the Utrecht Work Engagement Scale (UWES-9): a cross-cultural analysis. Eur J Psychol Assess. 2010;26(2):143–149. doi:10.1027/1015-5759/a000020
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gómez-Benito J, Sireci S, Padilla JL, et al. Differential item functioning: beyond validity evidence based on internal structure. Psicothema. 2018;30(1):104–109. doi:10.7334/psicothema2017.183
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Muñiz J, Elosua P, Hambleton RK. International test commission guidelines for test translation and adaptation. Psicothema. 2013;25:151–157. doi:10.7334/psicothema2013.24
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Arcos-Romero AI, Sierra JC. Factorial invariance, differential item functioning, and norms of the Orgasm Rating Scale (ORS). Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2019;19:57–66. doi:10.1016/j.ijchp.2018.11.001
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Van Dorssen-Boog P, de Jong J, Veld M, et al. Self-leadership among healthcare workers: a mediator for the effects of job autonomy on work engagement and health. Front Psychol. 2020;11:1420. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01420
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Derbis R, Jasiński AM. Work satisfaction, psychological resiliency and sense of coherence as correlates of work engagement. Cogent Psychol. 2018;5(1):1–16. doi:10.1080/23311908.2018.1451610
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Garrosa E, Blanco-Donoso LM, Moreno-Jiménez B, et al. Evaluación y predicción del work engagement en voluntarios: el papel del sentido de la coherencia y la reevaluación cognitiva [Evaluation and prediction of work engagement in volunteers: the role of the sense of coherence and cognitive reappraisal]. An Psicol. 2014;30(2):530–540. doi:10.6018/analesps.30.2.148701
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Malagon-Aguilera MC, Suñer-Soler R, Bonmatí-Tomas A, et al. Relationship between sense of coherence, health and work engagement among nurses. J Nurs Manag. 2019;27:1620–1630. doi:10.1111/jonm.12848
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Mitonga-Monga J, Hlongwane V. Effects of employees’ sense of coherence on leadership style and work engagement. J Psychol Afr. 2017;27(4):351–355. doi:10.1080/14330237.2017.1347757
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• García-Iglesias JJ, Gómez-Salgado J, Ortega-Moreno M, et al. Relationship between work engagement, psychosocial risks, and mental health among Spanish nurses: a cross-sectional study. Front Public Health. 2021;8:627472. doi:10.3389/fpubh.2020.627472
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Gorter RC, Freeman R. Burnout and engagement in relation with job demands and resources among dental staff in Northern Ireland. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol. 2011;39(1):87–95. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0528.2010.00568.x
   PubMed Web of Science ®Google Scholar
• Holmberg J, Kemani MK, Holmström L, et al. Psychological flexibility and its relationship to distress and work engagement among intensive care medical staff. Front Psychol. 2020;11:603986. doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.603986
   Web of Science ®Google Scholar