Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL)

mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma

Gaylor Hoskins, Brian Williams, Purva Abhyanker, Peter Donnan, Edward AS Duncan, Hilary Pinnock, Marjon Van Der Pol, Petra Rauchhaus, Anne Taylor, Aziz Sheikh

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

3 Citations (Scopus)
3 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

Background/aims
Despite being a core component of self-management, goal setting is rarely used in routine care. We piloted a primary care, nurse-led intervention (GOAL) for adults with asthma. Patients were invited to identify and prioritise their goals in preparation for discussing and negotiating an action/coping plan with the nurse at a routine asthma review.
Methods
The 18-month mixed-methods feasibility cluster pilot trial stratified then
randomised practices to deliver usual care (UC) or a goal-setting intervention
(GOAL). Practice asthma nurses and adult patients with active asthma were invited to participate. Primary outcome was asthma-specific quality-of-life. Semistructured interviews with a purposive patient sample (n=14) and 10 participating nurses explored GOAL perception. The constructs of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) were used to analyse and interpret data.
Results
Ten practices participated (5 in each arm) exceeding our target of eight. However, only 48 patients (target 80) were recruited (18 in GOAL practices). At six months post-intervention, the difference in mean asthma-related quality-of-life (miniAQLQ) between intervention and control was 0.1 [GOAL 6.20: SD 0.76(CI 5.76–6.65) versus UC 6.1: SD 0.81(CI 5.63–6.57)], less than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.5. However, change from baseline was stronger in the 3 intervention group: at six months the change in the emotions sub-score was 0.8 for intervention versus 0.2 for control. Costs were higher in the intervention group by £22.17. Routine review with goal-setting was considered more holistic, enhancing rapport and enabling patients to become active rather than passive participants in healthcare. However, time was a major barrier for nurses who admitted screeningout
patient goals they believed were unrelated to asthma.
Conclusions
The difference in AQLQ score from baseline is larger in the intervention arm than
the control, indicating the intervention may have impact if appropriately
strengthened. The GOAL intervention changed the review dynamic and was well
received by patients, but necessitated additional time, which was problematic in
the confines of the traditional nurse appointment. Modification to recruitment
methods and further development of the intervention are needed before
proceeding to a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.
Original languageEnglish
Article number584
JournalTrials
Volume17
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 8 Dec 2016

Fingerprint

Asthma
Randomized Controlled Trials
Nurses
Quality of Life
Negotiating
Self Care
Primary Health Care
Appointments and Schedules
Emotions
Interviews
Delivery of Health Care
Costs and Cost Analysis

Keywords

  • asthma
  • complex interventions
  • goal setting
  • mixed methods
  • Pilot cluster RCT
  • self management

Cite this

Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL) : mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma. / Hoskins, Gaylor; Williams, Brian; Abhyanker, Purva ; Donnan, Peter; Duncan, Edward AS; Pinnock, Hilary; Van Der Pol, Marjon; Rauchhaus, Petra; Taylor, Anne; Sheikh, Aziz.

In: Trials, Vol. 17, 584, 08.12.2016.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hoskins, Gaylor ; Williams, Brian ; Abhyanker, Purva ; Donnan, Peter ; Duncan, Edward AS ; Pinnock, Hilary ; Van Der Pol, Marjon ; Rauchhaus, Petra ; Taylor, Anne ; Sheikh, Aziz. / Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL) : mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma. In: Trials. 2016 ; Vol. 17.
@article{33e094aaa7924a89a77d666780efc210,
title = "Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL): mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma",
abstract = "Background/aimsDespite being a core component of self-management, goal setting is rarely used in routine care. We piloted a primary care, nurse-led intervention (GOAL) for adults with asthma. Patients were invited to identify and prioritise their goals in preparation for discussing and negotiating an action/coping plan with the nurse at a routine asthma review.MethodsThe 18-month mixed-methods feasibility cluster pilot trial stratified thenrandomised practices to deliver usual care (UC) or a goal-setting intervention(GOAL). Practice asthma nurses and adult patients with active asthma were invited to participate. Primary outcome was asthma-specific quality-of-life. Semistructured interviews with a purposive patient sample (n=14) and 10 participating nurses explored GOAL perception. The constructs of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) were used to analyse and interpret data.ResultsTen practices participated (5 in each arm) exceeding our target of eight. However, only 48 patients (target 80) were recruited (18 in GOAL practices). At six months post-intervention, the difference in mean asthma-related quality-of-life (miniAQLQ) between intervention and control was 0.1 [GOAL 6.20: SD 0.76(CI 5.76–6.65) versus UC 6.1: SD 0.81(CI 5.63–6.57)], less than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.5. However, change from baseline was stronger in the 3 intervention group: at six months the change in the emotions sub-score was 0.8 for intervention versus 0.2 for control. Costs were higher in the intervention group by £22.17. Routine review with goal-setting was considered more holistic, enhancing rapport and enabling patients to become active rather than passive participants in healthcare. However, time was a major barrier for nurses who admitted screeningoutpatient goals they believed were unrelated to asthma. ConclusionsThe difference in AQLQ score from baseline is larger in the intervention arm thanthe control, indicating the intervention may have impact if appropriatelystrengthened. The GOAL intervention changed the review dynamic and was wellreceived by patients, but necessitated additional time, which was problematic inthe confines of the traditional nurse appointment. Modification to recruitmentmethods and further development of the intervention are needed beforeproceeding to a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.",
keywords = "asthma, complex interventions, goal setting, mixed methods, Pilot cluster RCT, self management",
author = "Gaylor Hoskins and Brian Williams and Purva Abhyanker and Peter Donnan and Duncan, {Edward AS} and Hilary Pinnock and {Van Der Pol}, Marjon and Petra Rauchhaus and Anne Taylor and Aziz Sheikh",
note = "The project was funded by the Chief Scientist’s Office of the Scottish Government.",
year = "2016",
month = "12",
day = "8",
doi = "10.1186/s13063-016-1684-7",
language = "English",
volume = "17",
journal = "Trials",
issn = "1745-6215",
publisher = "BioMed Central",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL)

T2 - mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma

AU - Hoskins, Gaylor

AU - Williams, Brian

AU - Abhyanker, Purva

AU - Donnan, Peter

AU - Duncan, Edward AS

AU - Pinnock, Hilary

AU - Van Der Pol, Marjon

AU - Rauchhaus, Petra

AU - Taylor, Anne

AU - Sheikh, Aziz

N1 - The project was funded by the Chief Scientist’s Office of the Scottish Government.

PY - 2016/12/8

Y1 - 2016/12/8

N2 - Background/aimsDespite being a core component of self-management, goal setting is rarely used in routine care. We piloted a primary care, nurse-led intervention (GOAL) for adults with asthma. Patients were invited to identify and prioritise their goals in preparation for discussing and negotiating an action/coping plan with the nurse at a routine asthma review.MethodsThe 18-month mixed-methods feasibility cluster pilot trial stratified thenrandomised practices to deliver usual care (UC) or a goal-setting intervention(GOAL). Practice asthma nurses and adult patients with active asthma were invited to participate. Primary outcome was asthma-specific quality-of-life. Semistructured interviews with a purposive patient sample (n=14) and 10 participating nurses explored GOAL perception. The constructs of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) were used to analyse and interpret data.ResultsTen practices participated (5 in each arm) exceeding our target of eight. However, only 48 patients (target 80) were recruited (18 in GOAL practices). At six months post-intervention, the difference in mean asthma-related quality-of-life (miniAQLQ) between intervention and control was 0.1 [GOAL 6.20: SD 0.76(CI 5.76–6.65) versus UC 6.1: SD 0.81(CI 5.63–6.57)], less than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.5. However, change from baseline was stronger in the 3 intervention group: at six months the change in the emotions sub-score was 0.8 for intervention versus 0.2 for control. Costs were higher in the intervention group by £22.17. Routine review with goal-setting was considered more holistic, enhancing rapport and enabling patients to become active rather than passive participants in healthcare. However, time was a major barrier for nurses who admitted screeningoutpatient goals they believed were unrelated to asthma. ConclusionsThe difference in AQLQ score from baseline is larger in the intervention arm thanthe control, indicating the intervention may have impact if appropriatelystrengthened. The GOAL intervention changed the review dynamic and was wellreceived by patients, but necessitated additional time, which was problematic inthe confines of the traditional nurse appointment. Modification to recruitmentmethods and further development of the intervention are needed beforeproceeding to a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.

AB - Background/aimsDespite being a core component of self-management, goal setting is rarely used in routine care. We piloted a primary care, nurse-led intervention (GOAL) for adults with asthma. Patients were invited to identify and prioritise their goals in preparation for discussing and negotiating an action/coping plan with the nurse at a routine asthma review.MethodsThe 18-month mixed-methods feasibility cluster pilot trial stratified thenrandomised practices to deliver usual care (UC) or a goal-setting intervention(GOAL). Practice asthma nurses and adult patients with active asthma were invited to participate. Primary outcome was asthma-specific quality-of-life. Semistructured interviews with a purposive patient sample (n=14) and 10 participating nurses explored GOAL perception. The constructs of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) were used to analyse and interpret data.ResultsTen practices participated (5 in each arm) exceeding our target of eight. However, only 48 patients (target 80) were recruited (18 in GOAL practices). At six months post-intervention, the difference in mean asthma-related quality-of-life (miniAQLQ) between intervention and control was 0.1 [GOAL 6.20: SD 0.76(CI 5.76–6.65) versus UC 6.1: SD 0.81(CI 5.63–6.57)], less than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.5. However, change from baseline was stronger in the 3 intervention group: at six months the change in the emotions sub-score was 0.8 for intervention versus 0.2 for control. Costs were higher in the intervention group by £22.17. Routine review with goal-setting was considered more holistic, enhancing rapport and enabling patients to become active rather than passive participants in healthcare. However, time was a major barrier for nurses who admitted screeningoutpatient goals they believed were unrelated to asthma. ConclusionsThe difference in AQLQ score from baseline is larger in the intervention arm thanthe control, indicating the intervention may have impact if appropriatelystrengthened. The GOAL intervention changed the review dynamic and was wellreceived by patients, but necessitated additional time, which was problematic inthe confines of the traditional nurse appointment. Modification to recruitmentmethods and further development of the intervention are needed beforeproceeding to a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.

KW - asthma

KW - complex interventions

KW - goal setting

KW - mixed methods

KW - Pilot cluster RCT

KW - self management

U2 - 10.1186/s13063-016-1684-7

DO - 10.1186/s13063-016-1684-7

M3 - Article

VL - 17

JO - Trials

JF - Trials

SN - 1745-6215

M1 - 584

ER -