biostudies-literatureUnknown23(3)Bryant E<h4>Background</h4>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.<h4>Objectives</h4>This study examined the validity and reliability of the newly developed Brighton musculoskeletal Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM) within physiotherapy outpatient settings.<h4>Methods</h4>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 (internPhysiotherapy research international : the journal for researchers and clinicians in physical therapye1715https://www.ebi.ac.uk/biostudies/studies/S-EPMC6055852biostudies-literatureThe Brighton musculoskeletal Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness.PMC6055852Finucane LMercer CMoore APSmith TMurtagh SMcCrum CRowe DACanby GBryant EfalseThe Brighton musculoskeletal Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM): An assessment of validity, reliability, and responsiveness.<h4>Background</h4>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.<h4>Objectives</h4>This study examined the validity and reliability of the newly developed Brighton musculoskeletal Patient-Reported Outcome Measure (BmPROM) within physiotherapy outpatient settings.<h4>Methods</h4>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 (intern2018-01-01T00:00:00Z2018 Jul2025-04-04T23:42:37.597Z2019-03-26T23:48:17ZS-EPMC60558522974966710.1002/pri.1715