Project description:An increasing number of people are living longer with multiple health and social care needs, and may rely heavily on health system resources. When dealing with multiple conditions, patients, caregivers and healthcare providers (HCPs) often experience high treatment burden due to unclear care trajectories, a myriad of treatment decisions and few guidelines on how to manage care needs. By understanding patient and caregiver priorities, and setting treatment goals, HCPs may help improve patient outcomes and experiences. This study aims to examine the extent and nature of the literature on treatment goal setting in complex patients, identify gaps in evidence and areas for further inquiry and guide a research programme to develop definitions, measures and recommendations for treatment goal setting.This study protocol outlines a scoping review of the peer reviewed and the grey literature, using established scoping review methodology. Literature will be identified using a multidatabase and grey literature search strategy developed by two librarians. Papers and reports on the topic of goal setting that address complexity or complex patients will be included. Results of the search will be screened independently by two reviewers and included studies will be abstracted and charted in duplicate.Ethics approval is not required for this scoping review. Working with the knowledge users on the team, we will prepare educational materials and presentations to disseminate study findings to HCPs, caregivers and patients, and at relevant national and international conferences. Results will also be published in a peer-reviewed journal.
Project description:ObjectiveTo map the extant literature evaluating the use of technology for goal setting in adult rehabilitation and the impact of technology for patient outcomes.DesignScoping review.MethodsMEDLINE (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO), AMED and Scopus were searched for articles describing observational or interventional studies. ProQuest Dissertations and Theses database were searched for grey literature. Two review authors independently screened all titles and abstracts for potentially relevant articles. We included articles describing studies that had evaluated the development or application of technology to facilitate goal setting in rehabilitation for adults. Articles were excluded if the technology described did not include features to facilitate goal setting or were not in English. Narrative reviews, opinion pieces and editorials were also excluded.ResultsAfter screening 1640 publications of potential interest, we identified 27 studies for inclusion. These 27 articles described studies involving a total of 16 different technologies including, seven mobile apps, three websites, two mobile apps/website hybrids, two apps and two websites connected to a pedometer. We found that most technologies described were designed to facilitate self-management with goal setting as a feature and that only five included a shared decision moment around goal setting. Only six of the 16 technologies had research providing evidence of effectiveness in terms of improved patient outcomes, with the best evidence of beneficial effects associated with technologies that linked goal setting to pedometer use.ConclusionsThe identified technologies for use in adult rehabilitation that included goal setting as a feature were largely accepted and valued by patients and health professionals. The limited data suggest that there is a need for further research; specific foci may include the impact of incorporation of a shared decision-making moment and evaluation of effectiveness on patient outcomes.
Project description:IntroductionThe ongoing rise in the numbers of chronically ill people necessitates efforts for effective self-management. Goal setting and action planning are frequently used, as they are thought to support patients in changing their behavior. However, it remains unclear how goal setting and action planning in the context of self-management are defined in the scientific literature. This study aimed to achieve a better understanding of the various definitions used.MethodsA scoping review was conducted, searching PubMed, Cinahl, PsychINFO and Cochrane. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were formulated to ensure the focus on goal setting/action planning and self-management. The literature was updated to December 2015; data selection and charting was done by two reviewers. A qualitative content analysis approach was used.ResultsOut of 9115 retrieved articles, 58 met the inclusion criteria. We created an overview of goal setting phases that were applied (preparation, formulation of goals, formulation of action plan, coping planning and follow-up). Although the phases we found are in accordance with commonly known frameworks for goal setting, it was striking that the majority of studies (n = 39, 67%) did not include all phases. We also prepared an overview of components and strategies for each goal setting phase. Interestingly, few strategies were found for the communication between patients and professionals about goals/action plans. Most studies (n = 35, 60%) focused goal setting on one single disease and on a predefined lifestyle behavior; nearly half of the articles (n = 27, 47%) reported a theoretical framework.DiscussionThe results might provide practical support for developers of interventions. Moreover, our results might encourage professionals to become more aware of the phases of the goal setting process and of strategies emphasizing on patient reflection. However, more research might be useful to examine strategies to facilitate communication about goals/action plans. It might also be worthwhile to develop and evaluate goal setting/action planning strategies for people with different and multiple chronic conditions.
Project description:ObjectivesThis scoping review aims to map the literature on goal-setting tools in adult rehabilitation, exploring their characteristics, target users and supporting evidence to inform practice and future research in this area.MethodsWe completed a comprehensive search of four databases to identify relevant articles on tools for goal setting in rehabilitation. We followed Arkey and O'Malley's scoping review process to guide article selection, data extraction and data analysis.ResultsWe identified a total of 165 studies that reported on 55 different goal-setting tools, including tools for goal selection and goal documentation (n = 31), goal setting and intervention planning (n = 15), and for measuring the quality of the goal-setting process (n = 9). Over half of the tools were primarily designed for use in rehabilitation of physical disabilities (n = 32). Some tools fell under multiple sub-categories based on their characteristics as follows: 22 framework tools, 12 interview tools, 9 outcome measurement tools for goal achievement, 6 outcome measurement tools for goal quality and 25 documentation tools. The majority of goal-setting instruments targeted goals at the level of activity and participation (n = 51) and aimed to facilitate a client-centred or shared decision-making approach to rehabilitation planning (n = 46).ConclusionsThis study provides a comprehensive overview of existing goal-setting tools, highlighting their characteristics, target users and identified needs. These findings can enhance practitioners' awareness of the range of goal-setting tools available and can enable more effective utilization of these tools in clinical practice. Further research should investigate how clinicians can combine multiple tools to deliver goal setting.
Project description:ObjectiveIdentify, map, and synthesize existing reviews, to extract and analyse the most prominent barriers and facilitators to applying patient-centred goal-setting practice in rehabilitation using the Capability, Opportunity Motivation Behaviour (COM-B) model.DesignScoping review.Data sourceA primary search was conducted in MEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, PsychInfo, and Cochrane. Citation chaining was employed.Review methodsAll types of review (systematic, scoping, and narrative) studies published up to June 14, 2022 that included physical and neurological rehabilitation, patient-centeredness, and goal-setting were reviewed. Studies were scrutinized for relevance, quality was not assessed. The most prominent barriers and facilitators were synthesized using thematic content analysis and mapped onto the COM-B model.ResultsTwenty-six review studies covering a range of conditions and settings, acute to community were included. Barrier and facilitators were identified at patient, provider, and organizational level. Barrier themes include provider's existing beliefs about goal-setting, lack of skills, and integration into clinical routines. Patient barriers related to capacity and opportunity to participate. Organizational barriers include lack of clinical guidelines, patient preparation, insufficient provider time, and high productivity expectations. Facilitators included goal-setting guidelines, training and education of providers and patients, revised clinical routines, performance monitoring, adequate time, and resources.ConclusionHealthcare providers should be the primary target of intervention. A provider's motivation to change current practice is the most prominent barrier, followed closely by capacity and opportunity. Patients require information, training, and structured engagement opportunities. Organizations play a key role in creating the optimal environmental conditions to enable patient-centred goal-setting.
Project description:BackgroundBreast cancer and its treatment can have many physical and psychological effects on affected women. Women's personal goals may provide insight into their priorities and motivations in the context of breast cancer. Incorporating personal goal-setting into support and care interventions may have an effect on psychological well-being. This protocol describes our scoping review methods, the aim of which is to examine and map the existing evidence on personal goal-setting among women with a breast cancer diagnosis.MethodsOur scoping review will search for published, full-length articles, where personal goal-setting is a major component of the study, and the study population is females with breast cancer. MEDLINE, PsycInfo, CINAHL, EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, and AMED databases will be searched. Two independent reviewers will conduct all screening and extract data. Descriptive information about the studies, participants, any interventions, measurement tools, outcomes, and results will be reported.DiscussionThe results from this review will chart the literature, contributing to optimizing the incorporation of personal goal-setting approaches into effective interventions for the care and support of women with breast cancer.
Project description:ObjectivePriority areas for emergency care research are emerging and becoming ever more important. The objectives of this scoping review were to (1) provide a comprehensive overview of published emergency care priority-setting studies by collating and comparing priority-setting methodology and (2) describe the resulting research priorities identified.MethodsThe Joanna Briggs Institute methodological framework was used. Inclusion criteria were peer-review articles available in English, published between January 1, 2008 and March 31, 2019 and used 2 or more search terms. Five databases (Scopus, AustHealth, EMBASE, CINAHL, and Ovid MEDLINE) were searched. REporting guideline for PRIority SEtting of health research (REPRISE) criteria were used to assess the quality of evidence of included articles.ResultsForty-five studies were included. Fourteen themes for emergency care research were considered within 3 overarching research domains: emergency populations (pediatrics, geriatrics), emergency care workforce and processes (nursing, shared decision making, general workforce, and process), and emergency care clinical areas (imaging, falls, pain management, trauma care, substance misuse, infectious diseases, mental health, cardiology, general clinical care). Variation in the reporting of research priority areas was evident. Priority areas to drive the global agenda for emergency care research are limited given the country and professional group-specific context of existing studies.ConclusionThis comprehensive summary of generated research priorities across emergency care provides insight into current and future research agendas. With the nature of emergency care being inherently broad, future priorities may warrant population (eg, children, geriatrics) or subspecialty (eg, trauma, toxicology, mental health) focus and be derived using a rigorous framework and patient engagement.
Project description:Objectives: This scoping review identifies and details the scope of practice of health professionals who provide palliative care within the primary health setting in Australia. Methods: A scoping review approach was conducted on the Cinahl (Ebsco), Scopus, Medline (Ovid) and PubMed databases to extract articles from 1 December 2015 to 1 December 2020. Broad text words and MeSH headings were used with relevance to palliative care, general practice, primary health, and community setting. Extracted journal articles were limited to those based on the Australian population or Australian health system. Results: Eighty-four papers met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. The review identified the following health professional roles within the Primary Health Care setting undertaking palliative care: General Practitioner, Nurse, Pharmacist, Paramedics, Carers, and Allied Health professionals. Conclusion: This review offers a first understanding of the individual health professional roles and multidisciplinary team approach to actively providing palliative care within the Primary Health Care setting in Australia.
Project description:ObjectivesTo synthesize published research exploring emergency department (ED) communication strategies and decision-making with persons living with dementia (PLWD) and their care partners as the basis for a multistakeholder consensus conference to prioritize future research.DesignSystematic scoping review.Settings and participantsPLWD and their care partners in the ED setting.MethodsInformed by 2 Patient-Intervention-Comparison-Outcome (PICO) questions, we conducted systematic electronic searches of medical research databases for relevant publications following standardized methodological guidelines. The results were presented to interdisciplinary stakeholders, including dementia researchers, clinicians, PLWD, care partners, and advocacy organizations. The PICO questions included: How does communication differ for PLWD compared with persons without dementia? Are there specific communication strategies that improve the outcomes of ED care? Future research areas were prioritized.ResultsFrom 5451 studies identified for PICO-1, 21 were abstracted. From 2687 studies identified for PICO-2, 3 were abstracted. None of the included studies directly evaluated communication differences between PLWD and other populations, nor the effectiveness of specific communication strategies. General themes emerging from the scoping review included perceptions by PLWD/care partners of rushed ED communication, often exacerbated by inconsistent messages between providers. Care partners consistently reported limited engagement in medical decision-making. In order, the research priorities identified included: (1) Barriers/facilitators of effective communication; (2) valid outcome measures of effective communication; (3) best practices for care partner engagement; (4) defining how individual-, provider-, and system-level factors influence communication; and (5) understanding how each member of ED team can ensure high-quality communication.Conclusions and implicationsResearch exploring ED communication with PLWD is sparse and does not directly evaluate specific communication strategies. Defining barriers and facilitators of effective communication was the highest-ranked research priority, followed by validating outcome measures associated with improved information exchange.
Project description:BackgroundThe healthcare system is faced by an ageing population, increase in chronic conditions and multimorbidity. Multimorbid patients are faced with multiple parallel care processes leading to a risk of fragmented care. These problems relate to the disease-oriented paradigm. In this paradigm the treatment goals can be in contrast with what patients value. The concept of goal-oriented care is proposed as an alternative way of providing care as meeting patients' goals could have potential benefits. Though, there is a need to translate this concept into tangible knowledge so providers can better understand and use the concept in clinical practice. The aim of this study is to address this need by means of a concept analysis.MethodThis concept analysis using the method of Walker and Avant is based on a literature search in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, PsychInfo, CINAHL, OTSeeker and Web of Science. The method provides eight iterative steps: select a concept, determine purpose, determine defining attributes, identify model case, identify additional case, identify antecedents and consequences and define empirical referents.ResultsThe analysis of 37 articles revealed that goal-oriented care is a dynamic and iterative process of three stages: goal-elicitation, goal-setting, and goal-evaluation. The process is underpinned by the patient's context and values. Provider and patient preparedness are required to provide goal-oriented care. Goal-oriented care has the potential to improve patients' experiences and providers' well-being, to reduce costs, and improve the overall population health. The challenge is to identify empirical referents to evaluate the process of goal-oriented care.ConclusionA common understanding of goal-oriented care is presented. Further research should focus on how and what goals are set by the patient, how this knowledge could be translated into a tangible workflow and should support the development of a strategy to evaluate the goal-oriented process of care.