A brief patient-reported outcome instrument for primary care: German translation and validation of the Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP)

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

Stefanie Joos¹  Kathrin Herrmann¹  Katharina Kraus¹  Katja Hermann¹ 

[1] Department of General Practice and Health Services Research, University Hospital Heidelberg, Vossstr. 2, Heidelberg, 69115, Germany

关键词: Questionnaires;    Psychometrics;    Primary health care;    Sensitivity to change;    Instrument translation;    Instrument validation;    Measure yourself medical outcome profile;    Patient-reported outcome measure;   

Others  :  1164561
DOI  :  10.1186/s12955-014-0112-5

 received in 2014-03-26, accepted in 2014-07-04,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile (MYMOP) is a patient-generated outcome instrument capable of measuring effects from a wide range of health care interventions. This paper reports the translation of this instrument into German (MYMOP-D) and the assessment of validity and sensitivity to change for the MYMOP-D. The instrument was piloted in a German primary care context.

Methods

The translation process was conducted according to international guidelines. Recruited patients of both general practitioners and non-medical Complementary and Alternative Medicine (CAM) practitioners (“Heilpraktiker”) in the German state of Baden-Wuerttemberg completed a questionnaire comprised of the MYMOP-D and the EQ-5D. Responses were analysed to assess construct validity. For assessing the instrument’s sensitivity to change, patients received the MYMOP-D again after four weeks at which point they were also asked for their subjective views on change of symptoms. Correlation between MYMOP-D and EQ-5D and sensitivity to change as gradient in score change and as standardized response mean (SRM) were calculated.

Results

476 patients from general practices and 91 patients of CAM practitioners were included. Construct validity of the MYMOP-D was given with a correlation of r = .47 with the EQ-5D. Sensitivity to change for subjective change of symptoms could only be analysed for improvement or no change of symptoms, as only 12 patients reported deterioration of symptoms. Results showed the expected smooth gradient with 2.2, 1.3, and 0.5 points of change for large, little improvement and no change, respectively. SRM for MYMOP-D Profile Score was 0.88.

Conclusions

The MYMOP-D shows excellent construct validity. It is able to detect changes when symptoms in patients improve or remain unchanged. Deterioration of symptoms could not be evaluated due to too few data. With its brevity and simplicity, it might be an important tool for enhancing patient-centred care in the German health care context.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 Hermann et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 图 表 】

Figure 1.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Thomson HJ, Winters ZE, Brandberg Y, Didier F, Blazeby JM, Mills J: The early development phases of a European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) module to assess patient reported outcomes (PROs) in women undergoing breast reconstruction. Eur J Cancer 2013, 49:1018-1026.
• [2]Chow A, Purkayastha S, Dosanjh D, Sarvanandan R, Ahmed I, Paraskeva P: Patient reported outcomes and their importance in the development of novel surgical techniques. Surg Innov 2012, 19:327-334.
• [3]Kirwan JR, Fries JF, Hewlett SE, Osborne RH, Newman S, Ciciriello S, van de Laar MA, Dures E, Minnock P, Heiberg T, Sanderson TC, Flurey CA, Leong AL, Montie P, Richards P: Patient perspective workshop: moving towards OMERACT guidelines for choosing or developing instruments to measure patient-reported outcomes. J Rheumatol 2011, 38:1711-1715.
• [4]Skevington SM, McCrate FM: Expecting a good quality of life in health: assessing people with diverse diseases and conditions using the WHOQOL-BREF. Health Expect 2012, 15:49-62.
• [5]Lloyd H, Jenkinson C, Hadi M, Gibbons E, Fitzpatrick R: Patient reports of the outcomes of treatment: a structured review of approaches. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2014, 12:5. BioMed Central Full Text
• [6]Paterson C: Measuring outcomes in primary care: a patient generated measure, MYMOP, compared with the SF-36 health survey. BMJ 1996, 312:1016-1020.
• [7]Paterson C, Britten N: In pursuit of patient-centred outcomes: a qualitative evaluation of the 'Measure Yourself Medical Outcome Profile'. J Health Serv Res Policy 2000, 5:27-36.
• [8]Polus BI, Kimpton AJ, Walsh MJ: Use of the measure your medical outcome profile (MYMOP2) and W-BQ12 (Well-Being) outcomes measures to evaluate chiropractic treatment: an observational study. Chiropr Manual Therap 2011, 19:7. BioMed Central Full Text
• [9]Hull SK, Page CP, Skinner BD, Linville JC, Coeytaux RR: Exploring outcomes associated with acupuncture. J Altern Complement Med 2006, 12:247-254.
• [10]Chung VC, Wong VC, Lau CH, Hui H, Lam TH, Zhong LX, Wong SY, Griffiths SM: Using Chinese version of MYMOP in Chinese medicine evaluation: validity, responsiveness and minimally important change. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2010, 8:111. BioMed Central Full Text
• [11]Paterson C: Seeking the patient's perspective: a qualitative assessment of EuroQol, COOP-WONCA charts and MYMOP. Qual Life Res 2004, 13:871-881.
• [12]Jolles BM, Buchbinder R, Beaton DE: A study compared nine patient-specific indices for musculoskeletal disorders. J Clin Epidemiol 2005, 58:791-801.
• [13]Paterson C, Unwin J, Joire D: Outcomes of traditional Chinese medicine (traditional acupuncture) treatment for people with long-term conditions. Complement Ther Clin Pract 2010, 16:3-9.
• [14]Paterson C, Langan CE, McKaig GA, Anderson PM, Maclaine GD, Rose LB, Walker SJ, Campbell MJ: Assessing patient outcomes in acute exacerbations of chronic bronchitis: the measure your medical outcome profile (MYMOP), medical outcomes study 6-item general health survey (MOS-6A) and EuroQol (EQ-5D). Qual Life Res 2000, 9:521-527.
• [15]Beaton DE, Bombardier C, Guillemin F, Ferraz MB: Guidelines for the process of cross-cultural adaptation of self-report measures. Spine 2000, 25:3186-3191.
• [16]Rowen D, Brazier J, Roberts J: Mapping SF-36 onto the EQ-5D index: how reliable is the relationship? Health Qual Life Outcomes 2009, 7:27. BioMed Central Full Text
• [17]Greiner W, Claes C, Busschbach JJ, von der Schulenburg JM: Validating the EQ-5D with time trade off for the German population. Eur J Health Econ 2005, 6:124-130.
• [18][http://www.who.int/classifications/icd/adaptations/icpc2/en/] webcite International Classification of Primary Care, Second Edition; .
• [19]Liang MH, Fossel AH, Larson MG: Comparisons of five health status instruments for orthopedic evaluation. Med Care 1990, 28:632-642.
• [20]Walters SJ, Brazier JE: Comparison of the minimally important difference for two health state utility measures: EQ-5D and SF-6D. Qual Life Res 2005, 14:1523-1532.
• [21]White A, Richardson M, Richmond P, Freedman J, Bevis M: Group acupuncture for knee pain: evaluation of a cost-saving initiative in the health service. Acupunct Med 2012, 30:170-175.
• [22]Szczurko O, Cooley K, Mills EJ, Zhou Q, Perri D, Seely D: Naturopathic treatment of rotator cuff tendinitis among Canadian postal workers: a randomized controlled trial. Arthritis Rheum 2009, 61:1037-1045.
• [23]Bowden A, Lorenc A, Robinson N: Autogenic Training as a behavioural approach to insomnia: a prospective cohort study. Prim Health Care Res Dev 2012, 13:175-185.
• [24]DeVine J, Norvell DC, Ecker E, Fourney DR, Vaccaro A, Wang J, Andersson G: Evaluating the correlation and responsiveness of patient-reported pain with function and quality-of-life outcomes after spine surgery. Spine 2011, 36:S69-S74.