Related Experiment Video
Updated: May 11, 2026
The Multiple Sclerosis Performance Test MSPT: An iPad-Based Disability Assessment Tool
Published on: June 30, 2014
Randomized Controlled Trial of Occupational Performance Coaching for Adults With Multiple Sclerosis
Dorothy Kessler1, Martina Franz1, Niloufar Malakouti1
1School of Rehabilitation Therapy, Queen's University, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Objective:
To determine if the receipt of occupational performance coaching (OPC) by adults living with multiple sclerosis (MS) improves participants' satisfaction with performance in daily activities (primary outcome); improves perceived performance in daily activities, resilience, autonomy, and participation; and reduces illness intrusiveness and effect of MS (secondary outcomes).
Design:
Two-group randomized clinical trial with a waitlist control.
Setting:
Community.
Participants:
Convenience sample of adults with MS were recruited through a research registry. Eighty-three individuals were approached; 35 were assessed for eligibility and 31 were enrolled and 30 completed baseline assessment (Final sample size, N=30). Participants were English-speaking, were without serious cognitive impairment or severe depression, and were not receiving other coaching interventions.
Interventions:
Six telephone sessions of OPC were delivered by a trained facilitator over 10 weeks. Initial sessions focused on goal setting, prioritization, and action planning. Subsequent sessions involved goal and action plan review, discussion of facilitators and barriers, and goal and plan refinement.
Main Outcome Measures:
Primary outcome was participants' satisfaction with performance in daily activities, as measured by the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM). Secondary outcome measures included the COPM performance rating, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Impact on Participation and Autonomy Questionnaire, Adapted Illness Intrusiveness Rating Scale, and MS Impact Scale. Measures were administered by a blinded assessor at baseline, 10 weeks, and 2 months.
Results:
Participants in the intervention and waitlist control groups were equivalent on demographic and outcome measures at baseline. At 10 weeks, the intervention group had significantly higher COPM ratings for both satisfaction (P<.001) and performance (P=.002). No other outcomes were significantly different. For the intervention group, the benefits of OPC were maintained at 2 months.
Conclusions:
OPC led to improved satisfaction with performance and performance in daily activities. Future research with a larger sample is needed to determine other effects and who benefits most from OPC.
