Amat-Fernández, ClaraPardo Cladellas, YolandaFerrer Forés, Maria MontserratBosch, GuillermoLizano-Barrantes, CatalinaBriseño-Diaz, RenataVernet-Tomás, MariaFumadó Ciutat, LluisBeisani, MarcRedondo Pachón, María DoloresBach Pascual, AnnaGarin Boronat, Olatz, 1979-Hospital de Mar Patient-Reported Measures Group2025-11-182025-11-182025Amat-Fernandez C, Pardo Y, Ferrer M, Bosch G, Lizano-Barrantes C, Briseño-Diaz R, Vernet-Tomas M, Fumado L, Beisani M, Redondo-Pachon D, Bach-Pascual A, Garin O; Hospital de Mar Patient-Reported Measures Group. Evaluating the implementation of PROMs and PREMs in routine clinical care: co-design of tools from the perspective of patients and healthcare professionals. Health Qual Life Outcomes. 2025 Feb 17;23(1):15. DOI: 10.1186/s12955-025-02333-71477-7525http://hdl.handle.net/10230/71921Background: Implementation of patient-reported measures (PRMs) is an integral element for patient-centered models; however, there is still hardly any quantitative evidence regarding its impact in routine care settings. The objective of this study was to codesign two concise tools that allow for a standardized and longitudinal assessment of the implementation of PRMs in routine care in terms of acceptability and perceived value from the perspective of both patients and healthcare professionals. Methods: A list of constructs and items to be presented, separately, to patients and healthcare professionals was created from evidence gathered through a narrative literature review. Focus groups, composed of either patients or healthcare professionals from different chronic conditions, were conducted for the co-design of independent assessments. Once agreement was reached, the content validity was examined in separate consensus meetings. Results: A total of 10 patients and 10 healthcare professionals participated in the focus groups. After 7 focus groups, the PRMs Implementation Assessment Tool for patients (PRMIAT-P) was developed with 33 items in 9 constructs, and the tool for healthcare professionals (PRMIAT-HP) had 33 items in 16 constructs. Content validity was confirmed for both tools. Conclusions: The perspective of patients and healthcare professionals regarding the implementation of PRMs in routine care can be evaluated quantitively with the PRMIAT tools. These tools are understandable, concise and comprehensive, and can be used in multiple settings and for different chronic conditions. They have been codesigned as a standard set to facilitate both longitudinal assessments and performing benchmarking among different initiatives.application/pdfeng© The Author(s) 2025. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.info:eu-repo/semantics/article2025-11-18http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-025-02333-7Co-designHealth care evaluation mechanismsHealth services researchHealthcare quality assessmentImplementation sciencePatient centered carePatient-reported experience measuresPatient-reported outcome measuresRoutine clinical careinfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess