{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.019169329073482427, 'fraction_numerical': 0.015061615700593337, 'mean_word_length': 5.005479452054795, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Work environments of people with mobility impairments and limitations: Mobility Device User Work Survey (MWS).

BACKGROUND
Few studies of employed people who use wheelchairs, canes, crutches or walkers have been reported in the literature. One reason for this paucity of research reports is that surveys are most often made of unemployed individuals with disabilities a defined broadly. Understanding the work site of successfully employed people who use mobility devices requires the development of as survey that can be used to examine the important features of worksite from employees who use mobility devices at their worksites.


OBJECTIVE
This article describes the development and psychometrics of a survey on currently employed people with lower limb impairments and mobility limitations who use mobility devices. The items in the Mobility Device User Work Survey (MWS) were based on interviews and survey items pilot tested on employed mobility device users.


PARTICIPANTS
A sample of 183 employed people who use mobility devices including wheelchairs, canes, crutches or walkers was recruited using internet postings on disability-related organizations. The average age of the sample was 46.3, most were college educated, 72% used wheelchairs and the average number of years of employment was 24.


METHODS
The MWS was completed by 183 people who met the inclusion criteria. The survey was sent to these same people a second time and 132 of them returned the second survey.


RESULTS
The MWS consists of 106 questions on demographic, work and worksite characteristics and 58 subjective evaluation items that were organized into five scales. The internal consistencies (Cronbach's alpha) of the five scales were moderate (0.72) to good (0.93). Stability values of the five scales were calculated using correlations between forms and ranged from 0.70 to 0.80. The evaluative scales were analyzed using exploratory factor analysis.


CONCLUSIONS
The MWS provides a tool for studying the variables that influence employed people who use mobility devices. Future studies of unemployed people who use mobility devices may benefit from using the results of the MWS to plan interventions.