At SHP we are committed to using outcome measures. Patient reported outcome measures (“PROMs”) are typically questionnaires completed by patients.  PROMs help us to understand a patient’s views of their symptoms, their functional ability and their health related quality of life (Black 2013). As well as helping clinicians to make better decisions about the health and wellbeing of the patient, PROMs also allow for comparisons to be made between different providers; making clinicians and healthcare providers accountable for what they do and driving improvements in services (Black 2013). These measures are also developed alongside patients and, therefore, include those types of questions that are important to patients. At SHP (where appropriate) we use evidence-based PROMs including those that are; specific to a patient’s condition – such as the Oxford Knee Score (Dawson et al 1998, Collins et al 2011), the Quick Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder & Hand scale (Beaton et al 2005) and the Neck Disability Index (Vernon & Mior 1991). related to a patient’s general health (such as the EQ-5D-5L (Herdman et al 2011)). related to a patient’s psychological wellbeing (such as the PHQ-9 (Arroll et al 2010) and the GAD-7 (Spitzer et al 2006)).   We also use PROMs that help us to tailor treatment to the individual and that help us predict a patient’s likelihood of developing a persistent problem; such as the STarT Back Screening Tool (Hill et al 2011).  These tools are known as “risk stratification tools” and they help us to provide the patient with the care that they need.  These tools also help to hold us accountable so that we don’t provide people with unnecessary treatment. Dr Massimo Barcellona has worked alongside Oxford University Innovation to develop a locally approved version of the Musculoskeletal Health Questionnaire (MSK-HQ) (Hill et al 2016).  The MSK-HQ was co-produced with patients to tease out the important parameters related to the individual with a musculoskeletal condition. These parameters include “pain severity, physical function, work interference, social interference, sleep, fatigue, emotional health, physical activity, independence, understanding, confidence to self-manage and overall impact” (Hill et al 2016).  Our locally approved version of the MSK-HQ is known as an “ePRO”, meaning that our patients can complete the measure either in clinic or remotely via the internet (Coons et al 2015). Throw in a little computer programming experience, and we have developed the ability for the MSK-HQ scoring to be calculated automatically and be available in real-time to facilitate the assessment and management process.