Utility of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure as an admission and outcome measure in interdisciplinary community-based geriatric rehabilitation

Abstract

In a community-based geriatric rehabilitation project, the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) was used to develop a coordinated, interdisciplinary, and client-centred approach focusing on occupational performance. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the utility of the COPM as an admission and outcome measure in an interdisciplinary geriatric rehabilitation context in Denmark. Eighteen occupational and physiotherapists administered the COPM among elderly citizens. Of 185 citizens referred to the study, 152 were admitted to rehabilitation based on health indices, and 124 completed the COPM after their admission, identifying 404 occupational performance issues in all. Post-assessment data were obtained from 95 participants and revealed statistically significant positive change (p < 0.001) in both performance and satisfaction with performance. Furthermore the therapists answered a questionnaire evaluating their experiences, showing that they found development in knowledge and community between the professions to benefit both therapists and citizens, and gained a better insight into their clients' everyday lives through the COPM. In conclusion, the COPM may be useful as an admission and outcome measurement for the rehabilitation of elderly citizens; however, aspects of education and administration must be considered before the instrument can be successfully administered in an interdisciplinary geriatric rehabilitation context.

Key words::

• assessment
• client-centred practice
• COPM
• general practice physician
• home care
• occupational therapy
• physiotherapy

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express their gratitude to the participating therapists and participants without whom the present study would not have been possible. They are also grateful to V Horstman, Lic.Sc., for advice on statistics. This paper was supported by grants from the Centre of Elderly Research, Bispebjerg Hospital, Denmark and from the Metropolitan University College, Denmark, and accomplished within the context of Centre of Ageing and Supportive Environments (CASE), at Lund University, funded by the Swedish Council for Working Life and Social Research.

Declaration of interest: The authors report no conflicts of interest. The authors alone are responsible for the content and writing of the paper.