Report Viewer

NINDS CDE Notice of Copyright
Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)
Available for purchase at this website: Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM)
Supplemental - Highly Recommended: Cerebral Palsy (CP)
Supplemental: Spinal Cord Injury (SCI), SCI-Pediatric (age 2 and over for parent report; age 6 and over for child report) and Stroke
Exploratory: Spinal Muscular Atrophy (SMA) and Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD)
Short Description of Instrument
Construct measured: Performance and satisfaction in leisure productivity and self-care from client perspective.
Generic vs. disease specific: Generic
Means of administration: Typically administered by an Occupational Therapist
Intended respondent: Participant, although a caregiver may respond on the participant's behalf
# of items: The five most urgent problems are identified.
# of subscales and names of sub-scales: N/A
# of items per sub-scale: N/A
Comments/Special Instructions
Background: The COPM is designed to detect change in an individual's self-perception of occupational performance over time. The instrument has been validated for ages 6-65+. The COPM has been translated into over 35 languages.
Scoring and Psychometric Properties
Scoring: Importance is ranked, performance and satisfaction are scored separately from 1-10. Scores (importance and performance and importance and satisfaction) can then be multiplied for a maximum of 100.
Psychometric Properties: Recent studies have featured psychometric properties including clinical utility, validity and responsiveness (Eyssen et al., 2011). The results were very positive, demonstrating support for the reliability and validity of the COPM. Clinical utility, examined through several different studies supports the use of the COPM with a wide variety of clients in various settings (Dedding et al., 2004; Verkerk et al., 2006). This measure has moderate inter-rater agreement and mean performance and satisfaction score reproducibility, but poor reproducibility for separate problem scores (Eyssen et al.,2005).
Strengths/Weaknesses: Some authors have commented that the tool can be time consuming and difficult to administer; requires the administrator to be comfortable with a patient centered approach; and due to the non-standardized interview, quality and consistency may vary between administrators. The COPM may be used for all levels and severities of injury but may be less appropriate for acute and early Phase trials/interventions.
The COPM has been well-established in adult and pediatric clinical samples (Cup et al., 2003; Dedding et al., 2004; Eyssen et al., 2005; Cusick 2006). Although it was adapted for very young children (Cusick et al., 2007), the COPM focuses assessment of performance in self-care, productivity and leisure (Law et al., 1990). The COPM has been used in SCI studies, several of which demonstrated its responsiveness to change (Mulcahey et al., 1995; Wangdell & Friden, 2010)
Administration: Time to administer is 10-20 minutes, no equipment is required, training can be conducted by reading an article/manual.
Law M, Baptiste S, McColl M, Opzoomer A, Polatajko H, Pollock N. The Canadian occupational performance measure: an outcome measure for occupational therapy. Can J Occup Ther. 1990;57(2):82-87.
Bickes MB, Deloache SN, Dicer JR, Miller SC. Effectiveness of Experiential and Verbal Occupational Therapy Groups in a Community Mental Health Setting. Occup Ther Mental Health. 2001;17(1):51-72.
Bodiam, C. The Use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for the Assessment of Outcome on a Neurorehabilitation Unit. Br JOccup Ther.1999;62(3):123-126.
Cup EH, Scholte op Reimer WJ, Thijssen MC, & van Kuyk-Minis MA. Reliability and validity of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure in stroke patients. Clin Rehabil. 2003;17(4):402-409.
Cusick, A., Lannin, N. A., & Lowe, K. (2007). Adapting the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for use in a pediatric clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil, 29(10), 761-766.
Dedding C, Cardol M, Eyssen IC, Dekker J, Beelen A. Validity of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure: a client-centred outcome measurement. Clin Rehabil. 2004;18(6):660-667.
Eyssen IC, Beelen A, Dedding C, Cardol M, Dekker J. The reproducibility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Clin Rehabil. 2005;19(8):888-894.
Eyssen IC, Steultjens MP, Oud TA, Bolt EM, Maasdam A, Dekker J. Responsiveness of the Canadian occupational performance measure. J Rehabil Res Dev. 2011;48(5):517-528.
Kirsh B & Cockburn L. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure: a tool for recovery-based practice. Psychiatr Rehabil J. 2009;32(3):171-176.
McColl MA, Law M, Baptiste S, Pollock N, Carswell A, Polatajko HJ. Targeted applications of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure. Can J Occup Ther. 2005;72(5):298-300.
Verkerk GJ, Wolf MJ, Louwers AM, Meester-Delver A, Nollet F. The reproducibility and validity of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure in parents of children with disabilities. Clin Rehabil. 2006;20(11):980-988.
Wangdell J. & Friden J. Satisfaction and performance in patient selected goals after grip reconstruction in tetraplegia. J Hand Surg Eur Vol, 2010;35(7):563-568.
Cusick A, Lannin NA, Lowe K. Adapting the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for use in a paediatric clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil. 2007;29(10):761-766.
Cusick A, McIntyre S, Novak I, Lannin N, Lowe K. A comparison of goal attainment scaling and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for paediatric rehabilitation research. Pediatr Rehabil. 2006;9(2):149-157.
Mulcahey MJ, Smith BT, Betz RR, Weiss AA. Outcomes of tendon transfer surgery and occupational therapy in a child with tetraplegia secondary to spinal cord injury. Am J Occup Ther. 1995;49(7):607-617.
Beckelhimer SC, Dalton AE, Richter CA, Hermann V, Page SJ. Computer-based rhythm and timing training in severe, stroke-induced arm hemiparesis. Am J Occup Ther. 2011;65(1):96-100.
Hill V, Dunn L, Dunning K, Page SJ. A pilot study of rhythm and timing training as a supplement to occupational therapy in stroke rehabilitation. Top Stroke Rehabil. 2011;18(6):728-737.
Kirton A, Andersen J, Herrero M, Nettel-Aguirre A, Carsolio L, Damji O, Keess J, Mineyko A, Hodge J, Hill MD. Brain stimulation and constraint for perinatal stroke hemiparesis: The PLASTIC CHAMPS Trial. Neurology. 2016;86(18):1659-1667.
Mann G, Taylor P, Lane R. Accelerometer-triggered electrical stimulation for reach and grasp in chronic stroke patients: a pilot study. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2011;25(8):774-780.
McCall M, McEwen S, Colantonio A, Streiner D, Dawson DR. Modified constraint-induced movement therapy for elderly clients with subacute stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2011;65(4):409-418.
McEwen S, Polatajko H, Baum C, Rios J, Cirone D, Doherty M, Wolf T. Combined Cognitive-Strategy and Task-Specific Training Improve Transfer to Untrained Activities in Subacute Stroke: An Exploratory Randomized Controlled Trial. Neurorehabil Neural Repair. 2015;29(6):526-536.
Page SJ, Hill V, White S. Portable upper extremity robotics is as efficacious as upper extremity rehabilitative therapy: a randomized controlled pilot trial. Clin Rehabil. 2013;27(6):494-503.
Polatajko HJ, McEwen SE, Ryan JD, Baum CM. Pilot randomized controlled trial investigating cognitive strategy use to improve goal performance after stroke. Am J Occup Ther. 2012;66(1):104-109.
Skidmore ER, Holm MB, Whyte EM, Dew MA, Dawson D, Becker JT. The feasibility of meta-cognitive strategy training in acute inpatient stroke rehabilitation: case report. Neuropsychol Rehabil. 2011;21(2):208-223.
Yang SY, Lin CY, Lee YC, Chang JH. The Canadian occupational performance measure for patients with stroke: a systematic review. J Phys Ther Sci. 2017;29(3):548-555.


Document last updated June 2020