Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Patient and provider perspectives on using goal attainment scaling in care planning for older adults with complex needs.
Clair, Catherine A; Sandberg, Shana F; Scholle, Sarah H; Willits, Jacqueline; Jennings, Lee A; Giovannetti, Erin R.
Affiliation
  • Clair CA; Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health, 615 N Wolfe St, Baltimore, MD, 21205, USA. cclair1@jhu.edu.
  • Sandberg SF; NORC at the University of Chicago, 4350 East-West Highway, Bethesda, MD, 20814, USA.
  • Scholle SH; National Committee for Quality Assurance, 1100 13th St, NW, Washington, DC, 20005, USA.
  • Willits J; National Committee for Quality Assurance, 1100 13th St, NW, Washington, DC, 20005, USA.
  • Jennings LA; Reynolds Section of Geriatric Medicine, University of Oklahoma Health Sciences Center, 1122 N.E. 13th Street, ORB 1200, Oklahoma City, OK, 73117, USA.
  • Giovannetti ER; MedStar Health Economics and Aging Research Institute, MedStar Health Research Institute, 5601 Loch Raven Boulevard, Baltimore, MD, 21239, USA.
J Patient Rep Outcomes ; 6(1): 37, 2022 Apr 13.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35416628
ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND:

Assess the feasibility of using goal attainment scaling (GAS) in care planning for older adults with complex needs. GAS is an individualized approach to goal setting and follow up using a quantified scale. To date, little is known about the feasibility of GAS among this population.

METHODS:

We conducted a qualitative study with a sample of 28 older adults and 23 providers from diverse settings to evaluate the value and challenges of this approach. We conducted semi-structured interviews and iteratively coded and analyzed interview transcripts for themes related to value, challenges, and implementation.

RESULTS:

Most older adults and providers reported that the GAS approach added value to the care encounter. GAS supported collaboration and patient accountability for their goals, though it could be demotivating to some patients. Some older adults and providers noted that GAS could be confusing and that it was uncomfortable to talk about negative outcomes (i.e., the - 2 and - 1 boxes of the scale). Factors that facilitated implementation included using visual copies of the GAS forms, having an established patient-provider relationship, practicing the approach, and having previous goal-related clinical training.

CONCLUSIONS:

GAS was feasible to implement across diverse settings, and, despite challenges, both older adults and providers reported that it added value to care planning encounters with the potential to improve delivery of person-centered care. Further efforts to demonstrate the applicability and benefit of this method for older adults are warranted, particularly to address implementation of the approach.
Key words

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Qualitative_research Language: En Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Type of study: Qualitative_research Language: En Journal: J Patient Rep Outcomes Year: 2022 Document type: Article Affiliation country: United States