Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Development and first validation of a patient-reported experience measure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (PREM-C9)
  1. Matthew Hodson1,
  2. C Michael Roberts2,
  3. Sharon Andrew3,
  4. Laura Graham1,
  5. Paul W Jones4,
  6. Janelle Yorke5
  1. 1 ACERS, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK
  2. 2 Barts and The London School of Medicine and Dentistry, Queen Mary University of London, London, UK
  3. 3 Department of Nursing & Midwifery, Victoria University, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia
  4. 4 Institute for Infection and Immunity, St Georges, University of London, London, UK
  5. 5 School of Nursing, Midwifery & Social Work, University of Manchester, Manchester, UK
  1. Correspondence to Dr. Matthew Hodson, ACERS, Homerton University Hospital NHS Foundation Trust, London, UK; homertoncopd{at}


We developed a chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) patient-reported experience measure (PREM-C9). 174 patients with COPD (86 [49%] with a confirmed diagnosis and 88 [51%] with a self-reported diagnosis of COPD) completed a 38-item list, COPD Assessment Test (CAT) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). Hierarchical and Rasch analysis produced a 9-item list (PREM-C9). It demonstrated fit to the Rasch model (χ² p=0.33) and correlated moderately with CAT (r=0.42), HAD-anxiety (r=0.30) and HAD-depression (r=0.41) (p<0.05). A substudy confirmed its ability to detect change prepulmonary and postpulmonary rehabilitation. The PREM-C9 is a simple, valid measure of experience of patients living with COPD, validated in this study population with mild to very severe disease; it may be a useful measure in research and clinical audits.

  • respiratory measurement
  • pulmonary rehabilitation
  • COPD
  • PREM

Statistics from

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.


  • Contributors All authors (MH, CMR, SA, LG, PWJ and JY) contributed to the study design, data interpretation and contributed to the manuscript. MH and JY were involved further in data collection, statistical analysis and drafting the initial manuscript.

  • Funding This work was commissioned as part of the North East London, North Central London and Essex, Health Innovation and Education Cluster (NECLES HIEC) & UCL Partners, in partnership with Anglia Ruskin and Manchester Universities.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

  • Ethics approval Ethical approval for the study was provided by the Bloomsbury National Research Ethics Committee (ref: 12/LO/2022).

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.