Division of Experimental Medicine, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, McGill University, Montreal, Canada.
Center for Outcome Research & Evaluation, McGill University Health Centre Research Institute, Montreal, Canada.
Disabil Rehabil. 2024 Feb;46(4):618-628. doi: 10.1080/09638288.2023.2170475. Epub 2023 Jan 27.
To identify the contexts in which goal setting has been used in chronic disease management interventions and to estimate the magnitude of its effect on improvement of health outcomes.
The strength of evidence and extent of potential bias in the published systematic reviews of goal setting interventions in chronic conditions were summarized using AMSTAR2 quality appraisal tool, number of participants, 95% prediction intervals, and between-study heterogeneity. Components of goal setting interventions were also extracted.
Nine publications and 35 meta-analysis models were identified, investigating 25 health outcomes. Of the 35 meta-analyses, none found strong evidence and three provided some suggestive evidence on symptom reduction and perceived well-being. There was weak evidence for effects on eight health outcomes (HbA1c, self-efficacy, depression, anxiety, distress, medication adherence, health-related quality of life and physical activity), with the rest classified as non-significant. Half of the meta-analyses had high level of heterogeneity.
Goal setting by itself affects outcomes of chronic diseases only to a small degree. This is not unexpected finding as changing outcomes in chronic diseases requires a complex and individualized approach. Implementing goal setting in a standardized way in the management of chronic conditions would seem to be a way forward.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONThe link between goal setting and health outcomes seems to be weak.Some levels of positive behavioural change could be of benefits to patients as seen by improved self-efficacy, patients' satisfaction and overall quality of life.Systematic and consistent application of personalized goal-oriented interventions considering patient's readiness to change could better predict improved outcomes.Incorporation of various goal setting components while actively engaging patient and/or their care givers in the process could appraise how goal setting could help with challenges in faced by people living with chronic conditions in different areas.
确定目标设定在慢性病管理干预中的应用背景,并估计其对改善健康结果的影响程度。
使用 AMSTAR2 质量评估工具、参与者人数、95%预测区间和研究间异质性,总结目标设定干预在慢性疾病中发表的系统评价的证据强度和潜在偏倚程度。还提取了目标设定干预的组成部分。
确定了 9 篇出版物和 35 项荟萃分析模型,调查了 25 项健康结果。在 35 项荟萃分析中,没有一项发现有强有力的证据,有三项提供了关于症状减轻和感知幸福感的一些提示性证据。有弱证据表明对 8 项健康结果(HbA1c、自我效能、抑郁、焦虑、痛苦、药物依从性、健康相关生活质量和体力活动)有影响,其余结果则无统计学意义。半数荟萃分析存在高度异质性。
目标设定本身仅对慢性病的结果产生微小影响。这一发现并不出人意料,因为改变慢性病的结果需要复杂和个性化的方法。在慢性病管理中以标准化方式实施目标设定似乎是一种前进的方向。
目标设定与健康结果之间的联系似乎较弱。
一些积极的行为改变水平可能对患者有益,因为自我效能、患者满意度和整体生活质量得到了提高。
系统地、一致地应用个性化的目标导向干预措施,考虑到患者改变的准备情况,可以更好地预测改善的结果。
在积极吸引患者和/或他们的照顾者参与目标设定过程的同时,纳入各种目标设定组成部分,可以评估目标设定如何帮助解决慢性病患者在不同领域面临的挑战。