The Brighton musculoskeletal Patient‐Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness. (11th May 2018)

• Record Type: Journal Article
• Authors: Bryant, Elizabeth; Murtagh, Shemane; Finucane, Laura; McCrum, Carol; Mercer, Christopher; Smith, Toby; Canby, Guy; Rowe, David A.; Moore, Ann P.
• Is Part Of: Physiotherapy research international. Volume 23:Number 3(2018)
• Page Start: n/a
• Page End: n/a
• Publication Date: 2018-05-11
• Subjects: musculoskeletal disorders -- patient‐centred outcome measure -- physiotherapy; Physical therapy -- Periodicals; Physical Therapy Modalities -- Periodicals; Physiothérapie -- Périodiques; 615.82
• DOI: 10.1002/pri.1715
• Languages: English
• ISSNs: 1358-2267

Abstract

Abstract: 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.