Detailled Information

Name of the Instrument/Tool The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)
First Description

Law et al., 1991; 1994; 1998

Year 1990
Domains
Concept of constructs Work
Population/Disease Generic
Originally developed for ---
Other rheumatic diseases
where can be applied (only if validated)
---
Additional population with no rheumatic diseases No
Language: Originally published in English
Available in Language Korean, Romanian, Korean, Estonian, Serbian, Czech, Spanish, Hebrew, Swedish, Russian, English, Lithuanian, Slovenian, Nepali, Ukrainian, German, Finnish, Maltese, Italian, Turkish, Vietnamese, Icelandic, Japanese, Croatian, Hungarian, Bulgarian, Danish, Portuguese, Arabic, Greek, Polish, Persian, Georgian, Dutch, Mandarin, Norwegian, Malay
REFERENCE IDENTIFICATION
Author/s McColl MA, PAtterson M, Davies D, Doubi L, Law M
Title Validity and community utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure
Journal Can J Occup Ther
Year 2000
Vol 67
Num 1
Pages 22-30
Country Canada
Language English
Other references of interest
Link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/10137673
Brief Description

Pilot testing of COPM: initial information about content validity, clinical utility and sensitivity to change.

Link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16323388
Brief Description

To assess the reproducibility

Link https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32952099/
Brief Description

Convergent validity and responsiveness of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for the evaluation of therapeutic outcomes for patients with carpometacarpal osteoarthritis

Instrument/Tool Translations References
Link https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11680919
Brief Description

To support the use of the COPM as a valid measure of self-reported performance.

DEVELOPER CONTACT INFORMATION
Correspondence to ---
E-Mail ---
Address ---
Website http://www.thecopm.ca/
Available 40-55 $
Links ---
DESCRIPTION OF THE INSTRUMENT
Type Of Measure Questionnaire
Brief Description

COPM is designed to assess patient outcomes in the area of self-care, productivity and leisure. Five-step process (problem definition, problem weighting, scoring, re-assessment, follow-up) using a semi-structured interview conducting by the therapist together with the patient, which measure individual/patient-identified problem area in daily functioning.

Number of Items ---
Range ---
Responses options/scale No
Developed for Clinical practice
PRACTICAL APPLICATION
Method of administration Interviewer/assessor
Recommendations to score ---
Score Interpretation Scale 1.0-10.0 (1.0= not able to do)
Cut-off points ---
Cut-off points applied to ---
Smallest detectable change if described ---
Smallest detectable change applied to ---
Completion time by the patient 0 minutes
Scoring time by the assessor 30-40 minutes
Training to score Not necessary
Strengths Widely used, Useful in clinical practice & research, Easy to use
Limitations ---
OTHER COMMENTS
Other Comments ---