The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) is a clinician-administered interview style questionnaire which measures the client’s self-perception of occupational performance. The client is asked to identify a number of activities of difficulty. Then, the client rates their perceived performance, importance, and satisfaction regarding each activity on a 1-10 scale. It is recommended to administer the COPM multiple times in order to determine changes in scores over time.
ICF Domain
Participation ▶ General tasks and demands
Administration
- Issues are rated 1-10 in importance.
- Goals are rated 1-10 in performance and satisfaction.
- Higher scores reflect greater importance, performance, or satisfaction.
- Mean scores for performance & satisfaction can be obtained.
Number of Items
Up to 5 items/goals selected from identified issues
Equipment
None
Languages
English, French, Hebrew, Mandarin, Persian, Spanish and 30+ others.
Training Required
Training is required and can be accessed here.
Availability
The COPM worksheet can be purchased here.
Measurement Property Summary
Number of studies reporting psychometric properties: 4
Interpretability
- MCID:
-
- Performance: 2.0
- Importance: 2.0
- Satisfaction: 2.0
- *Values referred to as Minimally Worthwhile Treatment Effect
(Boswell-Ruys et al. 2010; n=30, 25 males, 5 females; AIS-A/B only; motor level T1-12; mean (SD) 14.5 (12.3) years post-SCI)
Reliability – High
Number of studies reporting reliability data: 1
- High internal consistency:
- COPM performance: α = 0.93
- COPM satisfaction: α = 0.89
- High test-retest reliability:
- COPM performance: ICC = 0.99
- COPM satisfaction: ICC = 0.98
(Berardi et al. 2019; n=39, 71% males; mean (SD) age: 53 (15) years; time since injury: 15±14; level of injury: C4-L3)
Validity – Low to Moderate
Number of studies reporting validity data: 3
- Moderate correlation with the COPM subscales and the Functional Independence Measure (FIM) Motor subscale: (r = 0.388-0.514)
(Donnelly et al. 2004; n=41; missing demographic info for 3; 29 males; 18 paraplegia, 20 tetraplegia; 27 complete, 11 incomplete; traumatic and non-traumatic; mean (SD, range) 52 (73.1, 11-364) days post-SCI)
- Low correlation with the COPM and the Klein-Bell ADL Scale: ρ = 0.07
- Low correlation with the COPM and the SCIM III: r = 0.22-0.30, ρ = 0.17-0.30
(Berardi et al. 2019; n=39, 71% males; mean (SD) age: 53 (15) years; time since injury: 15±14; level of injury: C4-L3)
Responsiveness
Not established in SCI population
Floor/Ceiling Effect
Not established in SCI population
Reviewers
Dr. Carlos L. Cano-Herrera, Tyra Chu
Date Last Updated
December 31, 2024
Berardi A, Galeoto G, Guarino D, Marquez MA, Santis RD, Valente D, Caporale G, Tofani M. Construct validity, test-retest reliability, and the ability to detect change of the canadian occupational performance measure in a spinal cord injury population. Spinal Cord Series and Cases 2019;52:1-8.
https://www.nature.com/articles/s41394-019-0196-6
Boswell-ruys CL, Harvey LA, Barker JJ, Ben M, Middleton JW, Lord SR. Training unsupported sitting in people with chronic spinal cord injuries: a randomized controlled trial. Spinal Cord. 2010;48(2):138-43.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19597520
Donnelly C, Eng JJ, Hall J, et al. Client-centred assessment and the identification of meaningful treatment goals for individuals with a spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2004;42(5):302-7.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14993893
Samuelsson KA, Tropp H, Gerdle B. Shoulder pain and its consequences in paraplegic spinal cord-injured, wheelchair users. Spinal Cord. 2004;42(1):41-6.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14713943
