FAQ

FAQ about MYMOP^® and MYCaW^®

MYCaW^® and MYMOP^® are Person-Centred Outcomes Measures (PCOMs)

A PCOM is type of PROM (Patient Reported Outcome Measure), that enables people to make explicit the unique personal outcomes they value for their own goal achievement. Essentially a PCOM asks “what matters to you?” and allows that to be measured. The MYCaW tool, asks “what is your main concern that you would like help with?”. This ensures that the most pressing issue is always identified, and the service can best meet the needs of the user, increasing satisfaction ratings. The MYMOP tool asks what symptom is most bothering you and what activity is the symptom most affecting.

If you have a question not answered below, please email us at hello@meaningfulmeasure.co.uk.

Yes, it is. Both types of measures are filled in by a person, as opposed to a healthcare professional, to capture a person’s perspective. A PROM can only present a list of predetermined options against which an individual can rate themselves – this can create problems of suitability when a service caters for a heterogenous group of people. Not all the wording may be appropriate, not all the items listed may be relevant and relevant items may be missing. This can cause discontent with people using an outcome measure as well as with professionals who have to administer it.

A PCOM asks a person to determine the item themselves, and that is then scored and monitored. Therefore, the person using the service always gets to explain what is concerning or bothering them most. Interestingly, our research has shown that their concerns and symptoms are often different from the stated referral reasons on medical records, and different to what a healthcare professional would prioritise as most important from their medical perspective.

There have only been two versions in common use. The first was available after the paper was published in the BMJ in 1996, and this was revised to MYMOP2 after the second validation study in 1999. No revisions have taken place since then, so the version provided by Meaningful Measures is the MYMOP2 version.

Yes. Any of the patient identification at the top of the questionnaire can be removed or changed according to your need. Be careful that the layout of the scoring questions does not change in the process.

No, neither questionnaire has been tested in children under 14 years old. Dr Paterson’s experience is that children of about 11 and over can use it. Younger children need a parent or carer to help them, and the results must then combine both patient and helper perspectives. In this case it is important that the same person helps the child each time. However as there has been no validation done in children then MYCaW^® or MYMOP^® may not be the best questionnaire to use.

The tendency to want to please the practitioner or healthcare professional has to be accepted as a potential problem. Completing the follow-up without seeing the previous scores should help, though there is some evidence that patients can measure change in their condition better if they DO see their previous scores. Validation studies, which have involved interviewing patients and practitioners who are using MYMOP and MYCaW, have found this to be an infrequent problem. Some patients may in fact use it as a way to demonstrate they are not much better which is easier than actually saying that.

Yes, addiction could be symptom one on MYMOP^®. It is important that it is written in a way that allows people to score it as getting better or worse; so, addiction would be OK if that was how it was experienced rather than a yes/no assessment. Alternatively, the person could use something that was a consequence of addiction, and was particularly bothering him/her, maybe the motivating factor for getting help, like 'being unable to sleep' or ' being unable to get through a day without a fix, or 'doing nothing except looking for drugs'. The principal thing is that MYMOP^® should reflect the main concerns of the patient, the main thing they want your help with.

MYMOP^® is a problem specific measure. The reason that all items should relate to the same problem is that if the scores are going to be amalgamated into the profile score (the mean of the scored items) then it doesn't make sense for them to relate to different things. For example, if symptom 1 is headache and symptom 2 is a painful toe then the intervention may cure the headache, but the toe may get worse. In this scenario the profile score would show no change, and this would not be a useful measure of treatment outcome. So, MYMOP^® is a problem-specific measure, but the patient decides what constitutes the parameters of the problem.

If there is more than one problem and the patient can't prioritise then all you can do is do two MYMOP^® forms: one for each problem if you felt that would be the best solution. Supporting a person who is completing MYCaW^® to identify which concern is most pressing and severe can help them prioritise their need for support and can also help the professional to work out what the most urgent next steps are. So before reaching for another form, it is worth trying to prioritise first.

It is restricting for holistic practice, but some people can feel OK about it if they see the symptom/problem that is measured on MYMOP^® as a marker or flag for the wider picture. So, if the patient starts out being desperate about not being able to sleep, and has lots of other symptoms too, and the homeopath sees the sleep problem as only part of the wider picture, then measuring improvement in sleep should reflect the wider improvement, even though it doesn't fully explain it. For people who are using MYCaW^® we recommend you discuss with the patient which concerns is most urgent to support. This prioritising if often a valuable part of the consultation.

If one problem or concern resolves and is replaced by another, then start a new MYMOP^® or MYCaW^® form and enjoy the confirmation that at least something has got better!

Symptom 1 and 2 must both relate to the same problem, in the patient's eyes, and the medication relates to this same problem too, so it could relate to either symptom.

This depends on the type of consultation and therapy, and is different for initial MYMOP^® and MYCaW^® forms and follow-ups.

Initial MYMOP^® and MYCaW^® forms are usually best completed after the patient and practitioner have discussed the problem fully, but before either ‘hands on’ treatment or goals have been set. It fits naturally into the moment when the practitioner thinks he/she knows what the main problems are and wants to check that out with the patient (for MYMOP^®). Alternatively, it can be completed right at the end of the consultation.

Follow-up forms are best completed before a consultation, or right at the beginning of one, as they fit naturally with the enquiry of ‘how are you?’

Yes. MYMOP^® scoring was validated against SF36 - a Health-Related Quality of Life measure which has been extensively researched and used in cancer care. The validation showed that MYMOP^® scores were as responsive to change as the SF36 scores. MYCaW scoring was validated against FACIT-SpEx which has clear minimal important difference criteria. MYCaW^® scoring was as responsive to change as FACIT-SpEX. The MYCaW framework of concerns was cross-matched against items on 30 health-related quality of life items to understand how comprehensive it was. The MYCaW^® framework of concerns captures more information than all items combined on the questionnaires reviewed and the framework is iteratively updated every 5 or so years if new client concerns are identified on a regular basis.

No, you can’t, if you do, we do not recognise them as our tool, and it becomes invalidated. There are specific instructions on how to administer them as it was intended by its originator (Dr Charlotte Paterson). If you are interested in developing MYMOP^® or MYCaW^® in some way, we welcome a chat about it.

Yes, we have different licenses depending upon what type of user you are. You can find MYCaW^® licence information here and MYMOP^® license information here. If you have any questions, do not hesitate to get in touch.

We will happily support you to implement and analyse MYMOP^® or MYCaW^® – please have a look at our consultancy page for more information.

MYMOP^® is a problem-specific measure. The reason that all items should relate to the same problem is that if the scores are going to be amalgamated into the profile score (the mean of the scored items) then it doesn't make sense for them to relate to different things. For example, if symptom 1 is a headache and symptom 2 is a painful toe then the intervention may cure the headache, but the toe may get worse. In this scenario the profile score would show no change, and this would not be a useful measure of treatment outcome. So, MYMOP^® is a problem-specific measure, but the patient decides what constitutes the parameters of the problem. In some cases, patients may feel symptoms are related. The practitioner's role in this scenario is to explore with the patient as to whether they are connected or if would not be responsive to the treatments being used and are therefore not appropriate to put on the form together.

FAQ about MYMOP® and MYCaW®MYCaW® and MYMOP® are Person-Centred Outcomes Measures (PCOMs)

MYCaW®

MYMOP®

INFORMATION

FAQ about MYMOP^® and MYCaW^®

MYCaW^® and MYMOP^® are Person-Centred Outcomes Measures (PCOMs)

MYCaW^®

MYMOP^®