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.

This version is available at https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/20128/ Strathprints is designed to allow users to access the research output of the University of Strathclyde. Unless otherwise explicitly stated on the manuscript, Copyright © and Moral Rights for the papers on this site are retained by the individual authors and/or other copyright owners. Please check the manuscript for details of any other licences that may have been applied. You may not engage in further distribution of the material for any profitmaking activities or any commercial gain. You may freely distribute both the url (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk/) and the content of this paper for research or private study, educational, or not-for-profit purposes without prior permission or charge.Any correspondence concerning this service should be sent to the Strathprints administrator: strathprints@strath.ac.ukThe Strathprints institutional repository (https://strathprints.strath.ac.uk) is a digital archive of University of Strathclyde research outputs. It has been developed to disseminate open access research outputs, expose data about those outputs, and enable the management and persistent access to Strathclyde's intellectual output.

BackgroundGoal 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.MethodsG-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.ResultsG-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.ConclusionsG-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.

No abstract

No abstract

Understanding stroke survivor responses to attainable and unattainable goals is important so that rehabilitation staff can optimally support ongoing recovery and adaption. In this qualitative study, we aimed to investigate (i) stroke survivor's experiences of goal attainment, adjustment and disengagement in the first year after stroke and (ii) whether the Goal setting and Action Planning (G-AP) framework supported different pathways to goal attainment. In-depth interviews were conducted with eighteen stroke survivors' to explore their experiences and views. Interview data were transcribed verbatim and analysed using a Framework approach to examine themes within and between participants. Stroke survivors reported that attaining personal goals enabled them to resume important activities, reclaim a sense of self and enhance emotional wellbeing. Experiences of goal-related setbacks and failure facilitated understanding and acceptance of limitations and informed adjustment of, or disengagement from, unattainable goals. Use of the GAP framework supported stroke survivors to (i) identify personal goals, (ii) initiate and sustain goal pursuit, (iii) gauge progress and (iv) make informed decisions about continued goal pursuit, adjustment or disengagement. Stroke survivor recovery involves attainment of original and adjusted or alternative goals. The GAP framework can support these different pathways to goal attainment.

No abstract

No abstract