Goal setting and strategies to enhance goal pursuit in adult rehabilitation: summary of a Cochrane systematic review and meta-analysis

This is the author proof version of an article accepted for publication in European Journal of Physical and Rehabilitation Medicine 2016.Final version available from the publisher.This paper is based on a Cochrane Review published in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (CDSR) 2015, Issue 7, Art. No.: CD009727, DOI: 10.1002/14651858 (see www.thecochranelibrary.com for information?Article first published online: January 15, 2016.INTRODUCTION: Goal setting is considered an essential part of rehabilitation, but approaches to goal setting vary with no consensus regarding the best approach. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess the effects of goal setting and strategies to enhance the pursuit of goals on improving outcomes in adult rehabilitation. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, four other databases and three trial registries for randomized control trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs, or quasi-RCTs published before December 2013. Two reviewers independently screened all search results, then critically appraised and extracted data on all included studies. We identified 39 trials, which differed in clinical context, participant populations, research question related to goal use, and outcomes measured. Eighteen studies compared goal setting, with or without strategies to enhance goal pursuit, to no goal setting. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: These 18 studies provided very low-quality evidence for a moderate effect size that any type of goal setting is better than no goal setting for improving health-related quality of life or self-reported emotional status (N.=446, standard mean difference [SMD]=0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17 to 0.88), and very low-quality evidence of a large effect size for self-efficacy (N.=108, SMD=1.07, 95% CI: 0.64 to 1.49). Fourteen studies compared a structured approach to goal setting to “usual care” goal setting, where some goals may have been set but no structured approach was followed. These studies provided very low-quality evidence for a small effect size that more structured goal setting results in higher patient self-efficacy (N.=134, SMD=0.37, 95% CI: 0.02 to 0.71). No conclusive evidence was found to support the notion that goal setting, or structured goal setting in comparison to “usual care” goal setting, changes outcomes for patients for measures of participation, activity, or engagement in rehabilitation programs. CONCLUSIONS: This review found a large and increasing amount of research being conducted on goal setting in rehabilitation. However, problems with study design and diversity in methods used means the quality of evidence to support estimated effect sizes is poor. Further research is highly likely to change reported estimates of effect size arising from goal setting in rehabilitation.SD’s position at the University of Exeter Medical School is supported by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care South West Peninsula at the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Foundation Trust. The views expressed are those of the author(s) and not necessarily those of the National Health Service (NHS), the NIHR or the Department of Health

Opportunities, challenges and concerns for the implementation and uptake of pelvic floor muscle assessment and exercises during the childbearing years: protocol for a critical interpretive synthesis

This is the final version of the article. Available from the publisher via the DOI in this record.BACKGROUND: Pregnancy and childbirth are important risk factors for urinary incontinence (UI) in women. Pelvic floor muscle exercises (PFME) are effective for prevention of UI. Guidelines for the management of UI recommend offering pelvic floor muscle training (PFMT) to women during their first pregnancy as a preventive strategy. The objective of this review is to understand the relationships between individual, professional, inter-professional and organisational opportunities, challenges and concerns that could be essential to maximise the impact of PFMT during childbearing years and to effect the required behaviour change. METHODS: Following systematic searches to identify sources for inclusion, we shall use a critical interpretive synthesis (CIS) approach to produce a conceptual model, mapping the relationships between individual, professional, inter-professional and organisational factors and the implementation, acceptability and uptake of PFME education, assessment and training during the childbearing years. Purposive sampling will be used to identify potentially relevant material relating to topics or areas of interest which emerge as the review progresses. A wide range of empirical and non-empirical sources will be eligible for inclusion to encompass the breadth of relevant individual, professional, inter-professional and organisational issues relating to PFME during childbearing years. Data analysis and synthesis will identify key themes, concepts, connections and relationships between these themes. Findings will be interpreted in relation to existing frameworks of implementation, attitudes and beliefs of individuals and behaviour change. We will collate examples to illustrate relationships expressed in the conceptual model and identify potential links between the model and drivers for change. DISCUSSION: The CIS review findings and resulting conceptual model will illustrate relationships between factors that might affect the implementation, acceptability and uptake of PFME education, assessment and training during the childbearing years. The model will inform the development and evaluation of a training package to support midwives with implementation and delivery of effective PFME during the antenatal period. The review forms part of the first phase of the United Kingdom National Institute for Health Research funded 'Antenatal Preventative Pelvic floor Exercises And Localisation (APPEAL)' programme (grant number: RP-PG-0514-20002) to prevent poor health linked to pregnancy and childbirth-related UI. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42016042792.The APPEAL project is funded by a National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) programme grant for applied research (RP-PG-0514-20002). MP and SD were supported in their contribution to the development of the research proposal by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) for the South West Peninsula. CM is part-funded by the CLAHRC West Midlands, and DB is part-funded by the CLAHRC South London

Constipação crônica na infância: quanto estamos consultando em Gastroenterologia Pediátrica? Chronic constipation in childhood: how many visits to the Pediatric Gastroenterologist?

OBJETIVO: Comparar dois períodos em relação ao atendimento de constipação crônica - Tempo A (1992 a 1995) e Tempo B (2002 a 2005), avaliando o número de consultas por problemas gastrintestinais; o número e a porcentagem de consultas de crianças com constipação crônica; e o número de atendimentos de crianças com constipação crônica por período de atendimento. MÉTODOS: No Tempo A, 359 pacientes foram atendidos em um período de quatro horas por semana. No Tempo B, 624 pacientes foram atendidos em três períodos de quatro horas, totalizando 12 horas por semana. RESULTADOS: Houve aumento no número absoluto de pacientes, no número de consultas por problemas gastrintestinais (2,8 vezes) e no número de consultas por constipação crônica (2,6 vezes) no Tempo B, em relação ao Tempo A. Houve manutenção na proporção de consultas por constipação crônica: média de 35,6% no Tempo A e 34,6% no Tempo B. Ocorreu aumento no número de períodos de atendimento no Tempo B (2,9 vezes maior), com igual número de consultas por período de atendimento (média de 17,4 no Tempo A e 16,6 no Tempo B) e de consultas por constipação crônica por período de atendimento (média de 6,1 no Tempo A e 5,5 no Tempo B). CONCLUSÕES: O aumento no número absoluto, e não na proporção de atendimentos por constipação crônica, pode ter ocorrido pela manutenção da prevalência populacional deste distúrbio, gerando demanda contida de encaminhamento pelo pediatra generalista. O despreparo do pediatra generalista para o atendimento deste problema poderia levar a um aumento no número de encaminhamentos aos pediatras especialistas.<br>OBJECTIVE: To compare two periods (A - 1992-1995 and B - 2002-2005) regarding the number of office visits for chronic constipation, considering the number of visits for gastrointestinal problems; the number and percentage of visits for chronic constipation; and the number of visits for constipation per period of care. METHODS: During period A, 359 patients were assisted for a period of four hours/week. During period B, 624 patients were assisted at three different periods of four hours/week. RESULTS: From A to B, there was an increase in: number of patients assisted, number of visits due to gastrointestinal problems (2.8 times) and number of visits due to constipation (2.6 times). However, the proportion of visits due to constipation was similar in both periods (A - 35.6% and B - 34.6%). Also, there was a rise in the number of periods for clinical assistance in Time B (2.9 times greater), with an equal mean number of visits per period (A - 17.4 and B - 16.6) and mean visits due to constipation per period (A- 6.1 and B - 5.5). CONCLUSIONS: The increase number, but not proportion, of visits for constipation may have occurred due to a stable population prevalence of this disorder, generating demand beyond the capacity for referral by generalist pediatricians. Also, the lack of skill of the generalist pediatrician to manage this clinical problem could have increased the number of referrals to specialists