Cargando…
The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness
BACKGROUND: In response for the need of a freely available, stand‐alone, validated outcome measure for use within musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy practice, sensitive enough to measure clinical effectiveness, we developed an MSK patient reported outcome measure. OBJECTIVES: This study examined th...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2018
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6055852/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29749667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pri.1715 |
_version_ | 1783341262475100160 |
---|---|
author | Bryant, Elizabeth Murtagh, Shemane Finucane, Laura McCrum, Carol Mercer, Christopher Smith, Toby Canby, Guy Rowe, David A. Moore, Ann P. |
author_facet | Bryant, Elizabeth Murtagh, Shemane Finucane, Laura McCrum, Carol Mercer, Christopher Smith, Toby Canby, Guy Rowe, David A. Moore, Ann P. |
author_sort | Bryant, Elizabeth |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: In response for the need of a freely available, stand‐alone, validated outcome measure for use within musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy practice, sensitive enough to measure clinical effectiveness, we developed an MSK patient reported outcome measure. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the validity and reliability of the newly developed Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM) within physiotherapy outpatient settings. METHODS: Two hundred twenty‐four patients attending physiotherapy outpatient departments in South East England with an MSK condition participated in this study. The BmPROM was assessed for user friendliness (rated feedback, N = 224), reliability (internal consistency and test–retest reliability, n = 42), validity (internal and external construct validity, N = 224), and responsiveness (internal, n = 25). RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis indicated that a two‐factor model provides a good fit to the data. Factors were representative of “Functionality” and “Wellbeing”. Correlations observed between the BmPROM and SF‐36 domains provided evidence of convergent validity. Reliability results indicated that both subscales were internally consistent with alphas above the acceptable limits for both “Functionality” (α = .85, 95% CI [.81, .88]) and ‘Wellbeing’ (α = .80, 95% CI [.75, .84]). Test–retest analyses (n = 42) demonstrated a high degree of reliability between “Functionality” (ICC = .84; 95% CI [.72, .91]) and “Wellbeing” scores (ICC = .84; 95% CI [.72, .91]). Further examination of test–retest reliability through the Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated that the difference between “Functionality” and “Wellbeing” test scores did not vary as a function of absolute test score. Large treatment effect sizes were found for both subscales (Functionality d = 1.10; Wellbeing 1.03). CONCLUSION: The BmPROM is a reliable and valid outcome measure for use in evaluating physiotherapy treatment of MSK conditions. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-6055852 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2018 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-60558522018-07-30 The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness Bryant, Elizabeth Murtagh, Shemane Finucane, Laura McCrum, Carol Mercer, Christopher Smith, Toby Canby, Guy Rowe, David A. Moore, Ann P. Physiother Res Int Research Articles BACKGROUND: In response for the need of a freely available, stand‐alone, validated outcome measure for use within musculoskeletal (MSK) physiotherapy practice, sensitive enough to measure clinical effectiveness, we developed an MSK patient reported outcome measure. OBJECTIVES: This study examined the validity and reliability of the newly developed Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM) within physiotherapy outpatient settings. METHODS: Two hundred twenty‐four patients attending physiotherapy outpatient departments in South East England with an MSK condition participated in this study. The BmPROM was assessed for user friendliness (rated feedback, N = 224), reliability (internal consistency and test–retest reliability, n = 42), validity (internal and external construct validity, N = 224), and responsiveness (internal, n = 25). RESULTS: Exploratory factor analysis indicated that a two‐factor model provides a good fit to the data. Factors were representative of “Functionality” and “Wellbeing”. Correlations observed between the BmPROM and SF‐36 domains provided evidence of convergent validity. Reliability results indicated that both subscales were internally consistent with alphas above the acceptable limits for both “Functionality” (α = .85, 95% CI [.81, .88]) and ‘Wellbeing’ (α = .80, 95% CI [.75, .84]). Test–retest analyses (n = 42) demonstrated a high degree of reliability between “Functionality” (ICC = .84; 95% CI [.72, .91]) and “Wellbeing” scores (ICC = .84; 95% CI [.72, .91]). Further examination of test–retest reliability through the Bland–Altman analysis demonstrated that the difference between “Functionality” and “Wellbeing” test scores did not vary as a function of absolute test score. Large treatment effect sizes were found for both subscales (Functionality d = 1.10; Wellbeing 1.03). CONCLUSION: The BmPROM is a reliable and valid outcome measure for use in evaluating physiotherapy treatment of MSK conditions. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2018-05-11 2018-07 /pmc/articles/PMC6055852/ /pubmed/29749667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pri.1715 Text en © 2018 The Authors. Physiotherapy Research International Published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd. This is an open access article under the terms of the http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/ License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Research Articles Bryant, Elizabeth Murtagh, Shemane Finucane, Laura McCrum, Carol Mercer, Christopher Smith, Toby Canby, Guy Rowe, David A. Moore, Ann P. The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title | The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title_full | The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title_fullStr | The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title_full_unstemmed | The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title_short | The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
title_sort | brighton musculoskeletal patient‐reported outcome measure (bmprom): an assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness |
topic | Research Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6055852/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29749667 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/pri.1715 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT bryantelizabeth thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT murtaghshemane thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT finucanelaura thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mccrumcarol thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mercerchristopher thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT smithtoby thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT canbyguy thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT rowedavida thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mooreannp thebrightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT bryantelizabeth brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT murtaghshemane brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT finucanelaura brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mccrumcarol brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mercerchristopher brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT smithtoby brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT canbyguy brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT rowedavida brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness AT mooreannp brightonmusculoskeletalpatientreportedoutcomemeasurebmpromanassessmentofvalidityreliabilityandresponsiveness |