Areas of consensus and controversy about goal setting in rehabilitation: a conference report

Abstract

Objective: To consider clinical issues surrounding goal setting in neurological rehabilitation, and to identify priorities for future research. Participants: Twenty-four rehabilitation professionals were invited to attend because they had taught or published on the topic of goal setting. In addition two patient groups were represented. Evidence: (1) The results of a systematic literature review, (2) presentations given during the two-day conference by investigators working within the field of goal setting, (3) questions and statements from conference attendees during open discussion, (4) a report initially formulated by a panel composed of four of the conference attendees, and then circulated to all attendees for comment, (5) views of the conference attendees gathered using a modified Delphi technique. Consensus: There were significant areas of consensus about goal setting. The Delphi studies highlighted and confirmed these areas of general agreement with consensus that goal setting is a core component of the rehabilitation process, and that goals should be specific, ambitious, relevant and time limited, with incremental steps that lead to progressive achievement. It was also agreed that that goal setting has a major impact on the relationship between patient and professional, with the availability of professional time and expertise being key to the success of the process. Controversy: Areas in which there was more controversy centred on the evaluation of goal achievement and the benefits of ambitious rather than achievable goals. The need for patient-centred goal setting was recognized, although it was felt at times that there were conflicts that prevented this being attainable.