The COVS assesses functional mobility across a broad range of neurologic conditions.
13
45 minutes
15-45 minutes
Adults
18 - 64
yearsDo you see an error or have a suggestion for this instrument summary? Please e-mail us!
Acute Stroke: (Salter et al, 2010; n = 134; (retrospective study) mean age = 68.64 (14.2) years; mean time from stroke to rehab admission 31.84 (59.2) days; average length of stay = 50.36 (29.4) days)
| Measure |
Mean (SD) |
Min / max (%) |
| COVS Admission |
51.90 (18.78) |
0.7 / 0.7 |
| COVS Discharge |
67.58 (17.5) |
0 / 4.5 |
| FIM Admission |
73.86 (24.13) |
0.7 / 0 |
| FIM Discharge |
95.70 24.65) |
0 / 1.5 |
| BBS Admission |
26.28 17.49) |
1.5 / 0.7 |
| BBS Discharge |
38.00 16.98) |
0.7 / 9.7 |
SD = Standard Deviation
COVS = Clinical Outcome Variables Scale
FIM = Functional Independence Measure
BBS = Berg Balance Scale
Acute Stroke: (Ekstrand et al, 2008; n = 60; median LOS = 12.0 (2 to 48) days; mean age = 75.9 years)
Acute Stroke: (Salter et al, 2010)
|
Correlation matrix for the COVS, BBS and FIM: |
|
|
Admission |
Discharge |
|
Admission |
|
|
COVS |
BBS |
FIM |
COVS |
BBS |
FIM |
|
COVS |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
BBS |
0.895 |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
|
FIM |
0.823 |
0.817 |
1.00 |
|
|
|
|
Discharge |
|
COVS |
0.783 |
0.802 |
0.737 |
1.00 |
||
|
BBS |
0.750 |
0.818 |
0.697 |
0.895 |
1.00 |
|
|
FIM |
0.629 |
0.656 |
0.796 |
0.771 |
0.772 |
1.00 |
|
* All correlations significant at the p < 0.01 level |
Acute Stroke: (Hajek et al, 1997; n = 66; mean age = 63 years)
Excellent: COVS and FIM (r = 0.82)
Adequate: COVS and Barthel Index (r = 0.71)
Adequate: COVS and Rankin (r = 0.75)
Not statistically assessed, however, items were compiled to be representative of outcomes associated with a typical physiotherapy caseload (Seaby & Torrance, 1989)
Acute Stroke: (Salter et al, 2010)
SRM's for the*:
COVS = 1.23
BBS = 1.16
FIM = 1.36
*A value > 0.80 = a large effect size
*A value ~ 0.50 = a moderate effect size
*A value < 0.20 = a small effect size
Mobility Dysfunction: (Seaby, 1989)
Excellent Internal Consistency, alpha = 0.93
Acute Spinal Cord Injury: (Barker et al, 2007; n = 43, (21 (49%) had a complete injury and 22 (51%) an incomplete injury); mean age = 46 (10) years)
Test retest, with one assessment in-person and the other over the phone, mean time between assessments = 4 (4) days
Correlation between the TCOVS (Telephone administered) and COVS (administered in-person)
Excellent for the Composite score (ICC = 0.98)
Excellent for the General Mobility subscale (ICC = 0.97)
Excellent for the Ambulation Subscale (ICC = 0.99)
Mobility Dysfunction: (Seaby, 1989; n = 102 rehab patients (SCI, Amputee, Neurolocomotor) and 28 physiotherapists)
Excellent interrater reliability, ICC = 0.971 (1 to 2 days between assessments)
Excellent intraater reliability, agreement on all items >85%, items 1, 3, 10 and 11 tended to have lower, but still acceptable, agreement
Barker, R. N., Amsters, D. I., et al. (2007). "Reliability of the Clinical Outcome Variables Scale When Administered Via Telephone to Assess Mobility in People With Spinal Cord Injury."
Ekstrand, E., Ringsberg, K. A., et al. (2008). "The physiotherapy clinical outcome variables scale predicts length of hospital stay, discharge destination and future home facility in the acute comprehensive stroke unit." J Rehabil Med 40(7): 524-528.
Hajek, V., Gagnon, S., et al. (1997). "Cognitive and functional assessments of stroke patients: an analysis of their relation." Archives of physical medicine and rehabilitation 78(12): 1331-1337.
Salter, K., Jutai, J., et al. (2010). "Clinical Outcome Variables Scale: A retrospective validation study in patients after stroke."
Seaby, L. and Torrance, G. (1989). "Reliability of a physiotherapy functional assessment used in a rehabilitation setting." Physiother Can 41: 264-271.
We have reviewed more than 500 instruments for use with a number of diagnoses including stroke, spinal cord injury and traumatic brain injury among several others.