Access G-AP: development of an accessible goal setting and action planning resource for stroke survivors with aphasia.

PURPOSE: Goal setting is key to stroke rehabilitation, but access for people with aphasia is challenging. Based on the Goal setting and Action Planning (G-AP) framework, we developed an accessible goal setting resource (Access G-AP). METHODS: Access G-AP was designed using a three-phase, user-centred design process. Phase 1: Access G-AP Draft A was designed using evidence-based recommendations. Phase 2: Draft A was reviewed by stroke survivors with aphasia (focus groups 1&2) and rehabilitation staff (questionnaire). Phase 3: Suggested recommendations informed Access G-AP Draft B, which was further reviewed by stroke survivors with aphasia (focus group 3). The final version of Access G-AP was approved by stroke survivors with aphasia at a debrief meeting. Data were analysed using content analysis. RESULTS: Recommended design improvements included reducing text, adding bullet points, and diversifying images. Both participant groups highlighted that Access G-AP should be used collaboratively to support stroke survivor involvement. Staff recommended Access G-AP training and additional resources to support stroke survivors with severe aphasia. CONCLUSIONS: Access G-AP was co-developed to support people with aphasia to access and engage in stroke rehabilitation goal setting. Further research is required to establish the feasibility of Access G-AP in clinical practice.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONEvidence-based accessible formatting strategies and an iterative design process can inform the design of accessible goal setting resources.Accessible goal setting materials should be relevant to stroke survivors with aphasia and responsive to their needs.Rehabilitation staff require training and support to use accessible goal setting resources (like Access G-AP) with stroke survivors with aphasia, especially those with severe aphasia.Evaluation of the feasibility of Access G-AP in clinical practice is now required.

Goal adjustment by people living with long-term conditions: A scoping review of literature published from January 2007 to June 2018.

Long-term health conditions can limit achievement of personal goals. We aimed to map and synthesize definitions of goal adjustment, theoretical underpinnings, associations with recovery and supportive interventions for adults with long-term conditions. We searched multiple databases (January 2007-June 2018) and identified peer-reviewed research relating to goal adjustment. Data were charted, mapped and synthesized using content analysis and descriptive summaries. Two stakeholder consultations informed the review. Ninety-one articles were included. A range of long-term conditions were represented including cancer (22%), stroke (12%) and mixed neurological conditions (8%). Goal adjustment was one available option when faced with unattainable goals; other options were goal disengagement and goal re-engagement. Most studies were quantitative (58%), reporting mainly positive associations between goal adjustment, disengagement, reengagement and recovery. The Dual Process Model, Goal Adjustment Model and Self-Regulation Theory were most cited underpinning models/theory. Five interventions were identified; only one (self-system therapy) was evaluated in a randomized controlled trial. Our review provides original and significant insights into goal adjustment definitions, theoretical underpinnings and association with recovery. Effective interventions to support goal adjustment, disengagement and reengagement are lacking. This research-practice gap warrants attention to ensure people with long-term conditions are optimally supported when facing unattainable goals.

Facilitators and "deal breakers": a mixed methods study investigating implementation of the Goal setting and action planning (G-AP) framework in community rehabilitation teams.

BACKGROUND: High quality goal setting in stroke rehabilitation is vital, but challenging to deliver. The G-AP framework (including staff training and a stroke survivor held G-AP record) guides patient centred goal setting with stroke survivors in community rehabilitation teams. We found G-AP was acceptable, feasible to deliver and clinically useful in one team. The aim of this study was to conduct a mixed methods investigation of G-AP implementation in diverse community teams prior to a large-scale evaluation. METHODS: We approached Scottish community rehabilitation teams to take part. Following training, G-AP was delivered to stroke survivors within participating teams for 6 months. We investigated staff experiences of G-AP training and its implementation using focus groups and a training questionnaire. We investigated fidelity of G-AP delivery through case note review. Focus group data were analysed using a Framework approach; identified themes were mapped into Normalisation Process Theory constructs. Questionnaire and case note data were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: We recruited three teams comprising 55 rehabilitation staff. Almost all staff (93%, 51/55) participated in G-AP training; of those, 80% (n = 41/51) completed the training questionnaire. Training was rated as 'good' or 'very good' by almost all staff (92%, n = 37/41). G-AP was broadly implemented as intended in two teams. Implementation facilitators included - G-AP 'made sense'; repetitive use of G-AP in practice; flexible G-AP delivery and positive staff appraisals of G-AP impact. G-AP failed to gain traction in the third team. Implementation barriers included - delays between G-AP training and implementation; limited leadership engagement; a poor 'fit' between G-AP and the team organisational structure and simultaneous delivery of other goal setting methods. Staff recommended (i) development of training to include implementation planning; (ii) ongoing local implementation review and tailoring, and (iii) development of electronic and aphasia friendly G-AP records. CONCLUSIONS: The interaction between G-AP and the practice setting is critical to implementation success or failure. Whilst facilitators support implementation success, barriers can collectively act as implementation "deal breakers". Local G-AP implementation efforts should be planned, monitored and tailored. These insights can inform implementation of other complex interventions in community rehabilitation settings.

Goal setting practice in services delivering community-based stroke rehabilitation: a United Kingdom (UK) wide survey.

PURPOSE: We investigated the nature of services providing community-based stroke rehabilitation across the UK, and goal setting practice used within them, to inform evaluation of a goal setting and action planning (G-AP) framework. METHODS: We designed, piloted and electronically distributed a survey to health professionals working in community-based stroke rehabilitation settings across the UK. We optimised recruitment using a multi-faceted strategy. RESULTS: Responses were analysed from 437 services. Services size, composition and input was highly variable; however, most were multi-disciplinary (82%; n = 335/407) and provided input to a mixed diagnostic group of patients (71%; n = 312/437). Ninety one percent of services (n = 358/395) reported setting goals with "all" or "most" stroke survivors. Seventeen percent (n = 65/380) reported that no methods were used to guide goal setting practice; 47% (n = 148/315) reported use of informal methods only. Goal setting practice varied, e.g. 98% of services (n = 362/369) reported routinely asking patients about goal priorities; 39% (n = 141/360) reported routinely providing patients with a copy of their goals. CONCLUSIONS: Goal setting is embedded within community-based stroke rehabilitation; however, practice varies and is potentially sub-optimal. Further evaluation of the G-AP framework is warranted to inform optimal practice. Evaluation design will take account of the diverse service models that exist. Implications for Rehabilitation Community-based stroke rehabilitation services across the UK are diverse and tend to see a mixed diagnostic group of patients. Goal setting is implemented routinely within community-based stroke rehabilitation services; however, practice is variable and potentially sub-optimal. Further evaluation of the G-AP framework is warranted to assess its effectiveness in practice.

Implementing a framework for goal setting in community based stroke rehabilitation: a process evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Goal setting is considered 'best practice' in stroke rehabilitation; however, there is no consensus regarding the key components of goal setting interventions or how they should be optimally delivered in practice. We developed a theory-based goal setting and action planning framework (G-AP) to guide goal setting practice. G-AP has 4 stages: goal negotiation, goal setting, action planning & coping planning and appraisal & feedback. All stages are recorded in a patient-held record. In this study we examined the implementation, acceptability and perceived benefits of G-AP in one community rehabilitation team with people recovering from stroke. METHODS: G-AP was implemented for 6 months with 23 stroke patients. In-depth interviews with 8 patients and 8 health professionals were analysed thematically to investigate views of its implementation, acceptability and perceived benefits. Case notes of interviewed patients were analysed descriptively to assess the fidelity of G-AP implementation. RESULTS: G-AP was mostly implemented according to protocol with deviations noted at the planning and appraisal and feedback stages. Each stage was felt to make a useful contribution to the overall process; however, in practice, goal negotiation and goal setting merged into one stage and the appraisal and feedback stage included an explicit decision making component. Only two issues were raised regarding G-APs acceptability: (i) health professionals were concerned about the impact of goal non-attainment on patient's well-being (patients did not share their concerns), and (ii) some patients and health professionals found the patient-held record unhelpful. G-AP was felt to have a positive impact on patient goal attainment and professional goal setting practice. Collaborative partnerships between health professionals and patients were apparent throughout the process. CONCLUSIONS: G-AP has been perceived as both beneficial and broadly acceptable in one community rehabilitation team; however, implementation of novel aspects of the framework was inconsistent. The regulatory function of goal non-attainment and the importance of creating flexible partnerships with patients have been highlighted. Further development of the G-AP framework, training package and patient held record is required to address the specific issues highlighted by this process evaluation. Further evaluation of G-AP is required across diverse community rehabilitation settings.

Goal setting and action planning in the rehabilitation setting: development of a theoretically informed practice framework.

BACKGROUND: Setting and achieving goals is fundamental to rehabilitation practice but has been criticized for being a-theoretical and the key components of replicable goal-setting interventions are not well established. PURPOSE: To describe the development of a theory-based goal setting practice framework for use in rehabilitation settings and to detail its component parts. METHODS: Causal modelling was used to map theories of behaviour change onto the process of setting and achieving rehabilitation goals, and to suggest the mechanisms through which patient outcomes are likely to be affected. A multidisciplinary task group developed the causal model into a practice framework for use in rehabilitation settings through iterative discussion and implementation with six patients. RESULTS: Four components of a goal-setting and action-planning practice framework were identified: (i) goal negotiation, (ii) goal identification, (iii) planning, and (iv) appraisal and feedback. The variables hypothesized to effect change in patient outcomes were self-efficacy and action plan attainment. CONCLUSIONS: A theory-based goal setting practice framework for use in rehabilitation settings is described. The framework requires further development and systematic evaluation in a range of rehabilitation settings.

Identifying and applying psychological theory to setting and achieving rehabilitation goals.

BACKGROUND: Goal setting is considered to be a fundamental part of rehabilitation; however, theories of behaviour change relevant to goal-setting practice have not been comprehensively reviewed. OBJECTIVES: (i) To identify and discuss specific theories of behaviour change relevant to goal-setting practice in the rehabilitation setting. (ii) To identify 'candidate' theories that that offer most potential to inform clinical practice. METHODS: The rehabilitation and self-management literature was systematically searched to identify review papers or empirical studies that proposed a specific theory of behaviour change relevant to setting and/or achieving goals in a clinical context. Data from included papers were extracted under the headings of: key constructs, clinical application and empirical support. RESULTS: Twenty-four papers were included in the review which proposed a total of five theories: (i) social cognitive theory, (ii) goal setting theory, (iii) health action process approach, (iv) proactive coping theory, and (v) the self-regulatory model of illness behaviour. The first three of these theories demonstrated most potential to inform clinical practice, on the basis of their capacity to inform interventions that resulted in improved patient outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Social cognitive theory, goal setting theory and the health action process approach are theories of behaviour change that can inform clinicians in the process of setting and achieving goals in the rehabilitation setting. Overlapping constructs within these theories have been identified, and can be applied in clinical practice through the development and evaluation of a goal-setting practice framework.