Introduction: Work-related musculoskeletal disorders are common among nursing staff and may affect functionality, psychological well-being, and work performance. Brief, culturally adapted, and psychometrically sound instruments are needed to characterize musculoskeletal risk in occupational settings. This study aimed to translate, culturally adapt, and examine the structural validity and internal reliability of the abbreviated version of the Örebro Musculoskeletal Screening Questionnaire in Peruvian nurses with musculoskeletal symptoms. Methods: An instrumental, cross-sectional study was conducted with a sample of 170 Peruvian nurses. The Spanish-adapted version of the ÖMSQ-12S was administered. Descriptive statistics, corrected item-total correlations, confirmatory factor analysis using the robust maximum likelihood estimator, internal reliability through Cronbach’s alpha and composite reliability, convergent validity through average variance extracted, and discriminant validity using the Fornell–Larcker criterion were analyzed. Results: The original three-dimensional 12-item model showed inadequate fit: χ2(51) = 276.301, CFI = 0.713, TLI = 0.628, RMSEA = 0.161, and SRMR = 0.190. Due to low and divergent factor loadings, a refined 11-item, four-factor solution was evaluated: functionality/satisfaction, fear-avoidance, psychological aspects, and characteristics of the musculoskeletal problem. This model showed better fit: χ2(37) = 58.190, CFI = 0.971, TLI = 0.957, RMSEA = 0.058, and SRMR = 0.039. Reliability was adequate across all factors (α = 0.773–0.893; CR = 0.779–0.895). Convergent validity was acceptable in most dimensions, although discriminant validity was limited between psychological aspects and characteristics of the musculoskeletal problem. Conclusions: The ÖMSQ-11S showed preliminary evidence of structural validity and internal reliability in Peruvian nurses with musculoskeletal symptoms. However, its use as a predictive tool or universal occupational screening instrument requires further studies with longitudinal designs, more heterogeneous samples, and external clinical or occupational criteria.
Bardales-Caman et al. (Wed,) studied this question.