Cargando…
A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A Review
Background. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) assists occupational therapists to identify occupational performance problems using a client-centred approach. Since its first publication in 1991, there has been abundant evidence of the ability of the COPM to detect a statistically s...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
SAGE Publications
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9923202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36650928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00084174221142177 |
_version_ | 1784887687265648640 |
---|---|
author | McColl, Mary Ann Denis, Celine Boyer Douglas, Kate-Lin Gilmour, Justin Haveman, Nicole Petersen, Meaghan Presswell, Brittany Law, Mary |
author_facet | McColl, Mary Ann Denis, Celine Boyer Douglas, Kate-Lin Gilmour, Justin Haveman, Nicole Petersen, Meaghan Presswell, Brittany Law, Mary |
author_sort | McColl, Mary Ann |
collection | PubMed |
description | Background. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) assists occupational therapists to identify occupational performance problems using a client-centred approach. Since its first publication in 1991, there has been abundant evidence of the ability of the COPM to detect a statistically significant difference as an outcome measure. There has also been a tacit understanding that a difference of 2 points from pre-test to post-test on either Performance or Satisfaction COPM score represents a clinically significant difference. There is however, some confusion about the origins of this claim. Purpose. To ascertain empirical evidence for the claim that a clinically significant difference is a change score ≥2 points. Method. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature (1991–2020) for intervention studies using the COPM as an outcome measure and examined intervention type and change scores. Findings. One hundred studies were identified. The COPM was used to assess effectiveness of eight types of occupational therapy interventions. The common belief, however, was not empirically supported that clinical significance can be asserted on the basis of a two-point change in COPM scores. Implications. Further research is needed to test alternative approaches to asserting clinical significance or a minimal clinically important difference. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-9923202 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | SAGE Publications |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-99232022023-02-14 A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A Review McColl, Mary Ann Denis, Celine Boyer Douglas, Kate-Lin Gilmour, Justin Haveman, Nicole Petersen, Meaghan Presswell, Brittany Law, Mary Can J Occup Ther Original Articles / Articles originaux Background. The Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) assists occupational therapists to identify occupational performance problems using a client-centred approach. Since its first publication in 1991, there has been abundant evidence of the ability of the COPM to detect a statistically significant difference as an outcome measure. There has also been a tacit understanding that a difference of 2 points from pre-test to post-test on either Performance or Satisfaction COPM score represents a clinically significant difference. There is however, some confusion about the origins of this claim. Purpose. To ascertain empirical evidence for the claim that a clinically significant difference is a change score ≥2 points. Method. We conducted a scoping review of peer-reviewed literature (1991–2020) for intervention studies using the COPM as an outcome measure and examined intervention type and change scores. Findings. One hundred studies were identified. The COPM was used to assess effectiveness of eight types of occupational therapy interventions. The common belief, however, was not empirically supported that clinical significance can be asserted on the basis of a two-point change in COPM scores. Implications. Further research is needed to test alternative approaches to asserting clinical significance or a minimal clinically important difference. SAGE Publications 2023-01-17 2023-03 /pmc/articles/PMC9923202/ /pubmed/36650928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00084174221142177 Text en © CAOT 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided the original work is attributed as specified on the SAGE and Open Access page (https://us.sagepub.com/en-us/nam/open-access-at-sage). |
spellingShingle | Original Articles / Articles originaux McColl, Mary Ann Denis, Celine Boyer Douglas, Kate-Lin Gilmour, Justin Haveman, Nicole Petersen, Meaghan Presswell, Brittany Law, Mary A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A Review |
title | A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A
Review |
title_full | A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A
Review |
title_fullStr | A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A
Review |
title_full_unstemmed | A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A
Review |
title_short | A Clinically Significant Difference on the COPM: A
Review |
title_sort | clinically significant difference on the copm: a
review |
topic | Original Articles / Articles originaux |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9923202/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36650928 http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/00084174221142177 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT mccollmaryann aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT deniscelineboyer aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT douglaskatelin aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT gilmourjustin aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT havemannicole aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT petersenmeaghan aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT presswellbrittany aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT lawmary aclinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT mccollmaryann clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT deniscelineboyer clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT douglaskatelin clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT gilmourjustin clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT havemannicole clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT petersenmeaghan clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT presswellbrittany clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview AT lawmary clinicallysignificantdifferenceonthecopmareview |