SMART 目标是否切合目的?澳大利亚社区药房心理健康服务使用者的目标规划。

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Victoria Stewart, Sara S McMillan, Jie Hu, Jack C Collins, Sarira El-Den, Claire L O'Reilly, Amanda J Wheeler
{"title":"SMART 目标是否切合目的?澳大利亚社区药房心理健康服务使用者的目标规划。","authors":"Victoria Stewart, Sara S McMillan, Jie Hu, Jack C Collins, Sarira El-Den, Claire L O'Reilly, Amanda J Wheeler","doi":"10.1093/intqhc/mzae009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Goal planning is an important element in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic/relevant, and timed (SMART) goals recommended as best practice. This study examined the use of SMART goals by Australian community pharmacists providing a brief goal-oriented wellbeing intervention with service-users experiencing severe and persistent mental illnesses (SPMIs), in particular, which aspects of SMART goal planning were incorporated into the documented goals. Goal data from the PharMIbridge Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) were used to investigate how community pharmacists operationalized SMART goals, goal quality, and which SMART goal planning format aspects were most utilized. Goals were evaluated using the SMART Goal Evaluation Method (SMART-GEM) tool to determine how closely each documented goal met the SMART criteria. Goals were also categorized into five domains describing their content or purpose. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the SMART-GEM evaluation results, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare the evaluation results across the goal domains. All goals (n = 512) co-designed with service-users (n = 156) were classified as poor quality when assessed against the SMART guidelines for goal statements, although most goals contained information regarding a specific behaviour and/or action (71.3% and 86.3%, respectively). Less than 25% of goals identified how goal achievement would be measured, with those related to lifestyle and wellbeing behaviours most likely to include measurement information. Additionally, the majority (93.5%) of goals lacked details regarding monitoring goal progress. Study findings raise questions regarding the applicability of the SMART goal format in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, particularly for service-users experiencing SPMIs. Further research is recommended to identify which elements of SMART goals are most relevant for brief interventions. Additionally, further investigation is needed regarding the impact of SMART goal training or support tools on goal quality.</p>","PeriodicalId":13800,"journal":{"name":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10880889/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Are SMART goals fit-for-purpose? Goal planning with mental health service-users in Australian community pharmacies.\",\"authors\":\"Victoria Stewart, Sara S McMillan, Jie Hu, Jack C Collins, Sarira El-Den, Claire L O'Reilly, Amanda J Wheeler\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/intqhc/mzae009\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Goal planning is an important element in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic/relevant, and timed (SMART) goals recommended as best practice. This study examined the use of SMART goals by Australian community pharmacists providing a brief goal-oriented wellbeing intervention with service-users experiencing severe and persistent mental illnesses (SPMIs), in particular, which aspects of SMART goal planning were incorporated into the documented goals. Goal data from the PharMIbridge Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) were used to investigate how community pharmacists operationalized SMART goals, goal quality, and which SMART goal planning format aspects were most utilized. Goals were evaluated using the SMART Goal Evaluation Method (SMART-GEM) tool to determine how closely each documented goal met the SMART criteria. Goals were also categorized into five domains describing their content or purpose. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the SMART-GEM evaluation results, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare the evaluation results across the goal domains. All goals (n = 512) co-designed with service-users (n = 156) were classified as poor quality when assessed against the SMART guidelines for goal statements, although most goals contained information regarding a specific behaviour and/or action (71.3% and 86.3%, respectively). Less than 25% of goals identified how goal achievement would be measured, with those related to lifestyle and wellbeing behaviours most likely to include measurement information. Additionally, the majority (93.5%) of goals lacked details regarding monitoring goal progress. Study findings raise questions regarding the applicability of the SMART goal format in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, particularly for service-users experiencing SPMIs. Further research is recommended to identify which elements of SMART goals are most relevant for brief interventions. Additionally, further investigation is needed regarding the impact of SMART goal training or support tools on goal quality.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13800,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"volume\":\"36 1\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-21\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10880889/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International Journal for Quality in Health Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae009\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal for Quality in Health Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/intqhc/mzae009","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目标规划是初级医疗保健机构提供的简短健康干预中的一个重要因素,具体、可衡量、可实现、现实/相关、有时间限制(SMART)的目标被推荐为最佳实践。本研究考察了澳大利亚社区药剂师在为患有严重顽固性精神疾病(SPMIs)的服务对象提供以目标为导向的简短健康干预时对 SMART 目标的使用情况,尤其是 SMART 目标规划的哪些方面被纳入了记录的目标中。来自 PharMIbridge 随机对照试验 (RCT) 的目标数据被用来调查社区药剂师如何操作 SMART 目标、目标质量以及 SMART 目标规划格式的哪些方面得到了充分利用。使用 SMART 目标评估方法 (SMART-GEM) 工具对目标进行评估,以确定每个记录的目标在多大程度上符合 SMART 标准。目标还被分为五个领域,描述其内容或目的。描述性分析用于描述 SMART-GEM 评估结果,Kruskal-Wallis H 检验用于比较不同目标领域的评估结果。在根据 SMART 目标陈述指南进行评估时,所有与服务用户(n = 156)共同设计的目标(n = 512)都被归类为质量较差,尽管大多数目标都包含有关具体行为和/或行动的信息(分别为 71.3% 和 86.3%)。只有不到 25% 的目标确定了如何衡量目标的实现情况,其中与生活方式和健康行为相关的目标最有可能包含衡量信息。此外,大多数目标(93.5%)都缺乏有关监测目标进展的详细信息。研究结果提出了关于 SMART 目标格式是否适用于初级医疗保健机构提供的简短健康干预的问题,特别是对于经历 SPMIs 的服务使用者。建议开展进一步研究,以确定 SMART 目标的哪些要素与简短干预最为相关。此外,还需要进一步调查 SMART 目标培训或支持工具对目标质量的影响。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Are SMART goals fit-for-purpose? Goal planning with mental health service-users in Australian community pharmacies.

Goal planning is an important element in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, with specific, measurable, achievable, realistic/relevant, and timed (SMART) goals recommended as best practice. This study examined the use of SMART goals by Australian community pharmacists providing a brief goal-oriented wellbeing intervention with service-users experiencing severe and persistent mental illnesses (SPMIs), in particular, which aspects of SMART goal planning were incorporated into the documented goals. Goal data from the PharMIbridge Randomized Controlled Trial (RCT) were used to investigate how community pharmacists operationalized SMART goals, goal quality, and which SMART goal planning format aspects were most utilized. Goals were evaluated using the SMART Goal Evaluation Method (SMART-GEM) tool to determine how closely each documented goal met the SMART criteria. Goals were also categorized into five domains describing their content or purpose. Descriptive analysis was used to describe the SMART-GEM evaluation results, and the Kruskal-Wallis H test was used to compare the evaluation results across the goal domains. All goals (n = 512) co-designed with service-users (n = 156) were classified as poor quality when assessed against the SMART guidelines for goal statements, although most goals contained information regarding a specific behaviour and/or action (71.3% and 86.3%, respectively). Less than 25% of goals identified how goal achievement would be measured, with those related to lifestyle and wellbeing behaviours most likely to include measurement information. Additionally, the majority (93.5%) of goals lacked details regarding monitoring goal progress. Study findings raise questions regarding the applicability of the SMART goal format in brief health interventions provided in primary healthcare settings, particularly for service-users experiencing SPMIs. Further research is recommended to identify which elements of SMART goals are most relevant for brief interventions. Additionally, further investigation is needed regarding the impact of SMART goal training or support tools on goal quality.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.90
自引率
3.80%
发文量
87
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The International Journal for Quality in Health Care makes activities and research related to quality and safety in health care available to a worldwide readership. The Journal publishes papers in all disciplines related to the quality and safety of health care, including health services research, health care evaluation, technology assessment, health economics, utilization review, cost containment, and nursing care research, as well as clinical research related to quality of care. This peer-reviewed journal is truly interdisciplinary and includes contributions from representatives of all health professions such as doctors, nurses, quality assurance professionals, managers, politicians, social workers, and therapists, as well as researchers from health-related backgrounds.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信