Pamela E Toto1, Elizabeth R Skidmore2, Lauren Terhorst2, Jules Rosen3, Debra K Weiner4. 1. Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, 5012 Forbes Tower, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA. Electronic address: pet3@pitt.edu. 2. Department of Occupational Therapy, University of Pittsburgh, 5012 Forbes Tower, Pittsburgh, PA 15260, USA. 3. School of Medicine, University of Pittsburgh M240 Scaife Hall 3550 Terrace Street Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA. 4. Geriatric Research, Education and Clinical Center - VA Pittsburgh Healthcare System, 3950 Allequippa Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15261, USA; School of Medicine and Clinical & Translational Science Institute, University of Pittsburgh, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the feasibility of generating patient-centered goals using GAS with older adults who have multiple chronic conditions, recruited through primary care. METHOD: Adults age 65+ (N=27) were recruited from a geriatric primary care center. Participants were asked to identify 2-4 activity-based goals and set attainment levels using GAS. At 8 weeks, participants were asked to rate current level of their goal performance. Physician surveys were used to evaluate if goals were realistic and feasible, and patient surveys were implemented to evaluate satisfaction. GAS T-scores were used to quantify change in goal achievement. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent (n=25) of participants were able to establish a minimum of two goals using GAS. 100% of participants were able to rate goal performance at follow-up. Physician survey results identified 100% of goals realistic and 93% achievable and 100% of participants were either neutral or satisfied with the process. Significant improvement was reported in GAS change scores (t(24)=6.54, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Findings support the feasibility of GAS for older adults with multiple chronic conditions in geriatric primary care as a strategy to facilitate patient-centered care and suggest that the process of personalized goal-setting itself may facilitate goal attainment.
OBJECTIVE: Evaluate the feasibility of generating patient-centered goals using GAS with older adults who have multiple chronic conditions, recruited through primary care. METHOD: Adults age 65+ (N=27) were recruited from a geriatric primary care center. Participants were asked to identify 2-4 activity-based goals and set attainment levels using GAS. At 8 weeks, participants were asked to rate current level of their goal performance. Physician surveys were used to evaluate if goals were realistic and feasible, and patient surveys were implemented to evaluate satisfaction. GAS T-scores were used to quantify change in goal achievement. RESULTS: Ninety-three percent (n=25) of participants were able to establish a minimum of two goals using GAS. 100% of participants were able to rate goal performance at follow-up. Physician survey results identified 100% of goals realistic and 93% achievable and 100% of participants were either neutral or satisfied with the process. Significant improvement was reported in GAS change scores (t(24)=6.54, p<0.001). CONCLUSION: Findings support the feasibility of GAS for older adults with multiple chronic conditions in geriatric primary care as a strategy to facilitate patient-centered care and suggest that the process of personalized goal-setting itself may facilitate goal attainment.
Authors: Brian W Waldersen; Jennifer L Wolff; Laken Roberts; Allysin E Bridges; Laura N Gitlin; Sarah L Szanton Journal: Arch Phys Med Rehabil Date: 2016-12-19 Impact factor: 3.966
Authors: Siobhan K McMahon; Beth Lewis; J Michael Oakes; Jean F Wyman; Weihua Guan; Alexander J Rothman Journal: West J Nurs Res Date: 2019-08-30 Impact factor: 1.967
Authors: Soha Abdellatif; Emily Hladkowicz; Manoj M Lalu; Sylvain Boet; Sylvain Gagne; Daniel I McIsaac Journal: Can J Anaesth Date: 2022-01-31 Impact factor: 6.713
Authors: Joseph A Carley; Jordan F Karp; Angela Gentili; Zachary A Marcum; M Carrington Reid; Eric Rodriguez; Michelle I Rossi; Joseph Shega; Stephen Thielke; Debra K Weiner Journal: Pain Med Date: 2015-11-05 Impact factor: 3.750
Authors: Stephanie Anna Lenzen; Ramon Daniëls; Marloes Amantia van Bokhoven; Trudy van der Weijden; Anna Beurskens Journal: PLoS One Date: 2017-11-27 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Susanne Guidetti; Kristina Tomra Nielsen; Cecilie von Bülow; Marc Sampedro Pilegaard; Louise Klokker; Eva Ejlersen Wæhrens Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2018-05-20 Impact factor: 2.692