PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: The Geriatric Day Program (GDP) of the Capital Health Region in Victoria, BC, is concerned with effective team processes, accountability for health service outcomes, and improving the quality of programs. The GDP identified a need to improve its interdisciplinary processes and generate useful patient outcome data. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To determine whether Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) could be introduced to facilitate interdisciplinary processes and to generate useful health outcome data. MAIN COMPONENTS OF PROGRAM: The GAS procedures were incorporated into clinical routines based on published guidelines. The authors determined GAS outcome scores for patients who completed the program and developed outcome scores for specific geriatric problem areas requiring intervention. Outcome scores were made available to the clinical care team and to program managers for continuous quality improvement purposes. CONCLUSIONS: The GAS process was successfully implemented and was acceptable to clinicians and managers at the GDP. Team processes were thought to be improved by focusing on patient goals in a structured way. The GAS provided data on both patient outcomes and outcomes of interventions in specific problem areas. Accountability for patient care increased. Goal Attainment Scaling provided indicators of care for which clinicians could develop program quality improvements.
PROBLEM BEING ADDRESSED: The Geriatric Day Program (GDP) of the Capital Health Region in Victoria, BC, is concerned with effective team processes, accountability for health service outcomes, and improving the quality of programs. The GDP identified a need to improve its interdisciplinary processes and generate useful patient outcome data. OBJECTIVE OF PROGRAM: To determine whether Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS) could be introduced to facilitate interdisciplinary processes and to generate useful health outcome data. MAIN COMPONENTS OF PROGRAM: The GAS procedures were incorporated into clinical routines based on published guidelines. The authors determined GAS outcome scores for patients who completed the program and developed outcome scores for specific geriatric problem areas requiring intervention. Outcome scores were made available to the clinical care team and to program managers for continuous quality improvement purposes. CONCLUSIONS: The GAS process was successfully implemented and was acceptable to clinicians and managers at the GDP. Team processes were thought to be improved by focusing on patient goals in a structured way. The GAS provided data on both patient outcomes and outcomes of interventions in specific problem areas. Accountability for patient care increased. Goal Attainment Scaling provided indicators of care for which clinicians could develop program quality improvements.
Authors: L V Rubenstein; D R Calkins; S Greenfield; A M Jette; R F Meenan; M A Nevins; L Z Rubenstein; J H Wasson; M E Williams Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 1989-06 Impact factor: 5.562