Skip to main content

The COOP Function Charts: A System to Measure Patient Function in Physicians’ Offices

  • Chapter
Functional Status Measurement in Primary Care

Part of the book series: Frontiers of Primary Care ((PRIMARY))

Abstract

This book is based on the premise that physicians need, but do not have, accurate and efficient methods for measuring a patient’s overall functional health status. In this chapter we describe a very brief method for measuring function and health that may be useful for routine use in primary care settings. This method is called the COOP chart system. The COOP chart system has been tested in many different practices in different parts of the world. This chapter is the second published report on the validity, reliability, and acceptability of the COOP charts. The first was published in the March 1987 supplement to the Journal of Chronic Disease (1). Further information on the COOP charts is available from the authors.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

eBook
USD 16.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Nelson EC, Wasson JH, Kirk JW: Assessment of function in routine clinical practice: description of the COOP Chart method and preliminary findings. J. Chron Dis. 40(S1):55S, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. McDowell I, Newell C: Measuring Health: A Guide to Rating Scales and Questionnaires. New York, Oxford University Press, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Katz S, Ford AB, Moskowitz RW, et al.: Studies of illness in the aged. The index of ADL: A standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA. 185: 914, 1963.

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. The Criteria Committee of the New York Heart Association, Inc.: Diseases of the Heart and Blood Vessels:Nomenclature and Criteria for Diagnosis. 6th ed. Boston, Little Brown; 1964.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Goldman L, Hashimoto B, Cook EF, et al.: Comparative reproducibility and validity of systems for assessing cardiovascular functional class: Advantages of a new specific activity scale. Circulation. 64 (6): 1277, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Nelson E, Conger B, Douglass R, et al.: Functional health status levels of primary care patients. JAMA. 249 (24): 3331–3338, 1983.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ware JE, Johnston SA, Davies-Avery A, et al.: Conceptualization and measurement of Health for Adults in the Health Insurance Study: Vol III Mental Health. R-1987/3-HEW. Santa Monica, CA: The Rand Corp., 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Bergner M, Bobbitt RA, Carter WB, et al.: The sickness impact profile: Conceptual formulation and methodology for the development of a health status measure. Mt J Health Serv. 6: 393, 1976.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Parkerson GR, Gehlbach SH, Wagner EH, et al.: The Duke—UNC health profile: An adult health status instrument for primary care. Med Care. 19: 806, 1981.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  10. Sackett D, Chambers L, MacPherson AS, et al.: The development and application of indices of health: General methods and a summary of results. American J Public Health. 67: 423–427, 1977.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hunt SM, McEwen J, McKenna SP: Measuring health status: A tool for clinicians and epidemiologists. JR Coll Gen Pract. 35: 185, 1985.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Ware JE Jr.: Standards for validating health measures: Definition and content. J. Chron Dis.40: 473–480, 1987.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Nunnally C: Psychometric Theory, New York, McGraw-Hill, 1978.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Powers SA: A PASCAL program to assess the interrater reliability of nominal scales. Edu Psychol Meas. 45: 613–614, 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Campbell DT, Fiske DW: Convergent and discriminant validation by the multitrait-y matrix. Psycho Bull. 56: 81–105, 1959.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Hayashi T, Hays RD. A microcomputer program for analyzing multitraitmultimethod matrices. Behav Res Methods Instruments and Computer. 19:345–348,1987. [Also, Santa Monica, CA, The Rand Corp. (P-7298)].

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Stewart AL, Hays RD, Ware JE: The MOS short-form general health survey: Reliability and validity in a patient population. Med Care. 26: 724–735, 1988.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Linn BF, Gurel L: Cumulative illness rating scale. JA Geriatric Society. 16(5):622–626, 1968.

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Ware JE, Brook RH, Davies-Avery A, et al.: Conceptualization and Measurement of Health for Adults in the Health Insurance Study: Vol I, Model of Health and Methodology. Santa Monica, CA, The Rand Corp. (R-1987/1-HEW), 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Stewart AL, Greenfield S, Hays RD, et al.: Functional status and well-being of patients with chronic conditions. JAMA. 262: 907–913, 1989.

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1990 Springer-Verlag New York, Inc.

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Nelson, E.C. et al. (1990). The COOP Function Charts: A System to Measure Patient Function in Physicians’ Offices. In: Functional Status Measurement in Primary Care. Frontiers of Primary Care. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8977-4_8

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-8977-4_8

  • Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY

  • Print ISBN: 978-0-387-97198-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-1-4613-8977-4

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics