Journal
JOURNAL OF REHABILITATION MEDICINE
Volume 41, Issue 7, Pages 528-535Publisher
FOUNDATION REHABILITATION INFORMATION
DOI: 10.2340/16501977-0383
Keywords
brain injuries; rehabilitation; outcome assessment; goals; ICF
Categories
Funding
- Luff Foundation
- Dunhill Medical Trust
- National Institute for Health Research [RP-PG-0407-10185] Funding Source: researchfish
Ask authors/readers for more resources
Objective: To compare goal attainment scaling (GAS) and standardized measures in evaluation of person-centred outcomes in neurorehabilitation. Design: A prospective cohort analysis from a tertiary inpatient neuro-rehabilitation service for younger adults with complex neurological disability. Subjects/patients: Consecutive patients (n = 164) admitted for rehabilitation following acquired brain injury (any cause) over 3 years. Mean age 44.8 (standard deviation 14.4) years. Diagnosis: 66% strokes, 18% trauma, 16% other. Male:female ratio 102:62. Methods: GAS-rated achievement of 1-6 patient-selected goals was compared with the Functional Assessment Measure (UK FIM+FAM), and Barthel Index (BI), rated on admission and discharge. Personal goals were mapped retrospectively to the FIM+FAM and International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health (ICF). Results: Median (interquartile range; IQR) GAS T-scores were 50.0 (44.2-51.8) and moderately correlated with changes in FIM+FAM and BI (both rho 0.38 (p < 0.001)). Standardized response means were 2.2, 1.6 and 1.4 for GAS, FIM+FAM and BI, respectively. Of 667 personal goals set, 495 (74%) were fully achieved. Although 413 (62%) goals were reflected by changes in FIM+FAM, over one-third of goals were set in other areas. Conclusion: GAS appeared to be more responsive, and captured gains beyond the FIM+FAM, thus providing added value as an adjunct to outcome measurement in patients with complex disability.
Authors
I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.
Reviews
Recommended
No Data Available