Goal setting with caregivers of adults in the community: a mixed methods systematic review.

Purpose: To examine how goal setting is used with caregivers of community residing adults and the effect of goal setting practices in improving the outcomes. Methods: A mixed methods systematic review was conducted. The methodological rigour of included studies was critiqued using Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias assessment tool, Downs and Black checklist and a framework for evaluating qualitative research. Narrative synthesis was created through tabulation and categorisation, visual mapping of the goal setting process, thematic analysis on common goal setting features and critical reflection on the accuracy and robustness of the synthesis. Results: Seventeen studies were included: 10 randomised trials, 5 other quantitative studies and two descriptive studies which incorporated qualitative methods. The trials demonstrated a relatively low risk of bias in contrast to the other studies that had varied methodological rigour. No studies isolated the effect of the goal setting process on outcomes and therefore the effectiveness of goal setting could not be evaluated. However, through a narrative synthesis six prominent features of collaborative goal setting were identified. Conclusions: Despite the fact that goal setting is an important component of client-centred care, and the prominence of client-centred care in healthcare discourse, the review uncovered a surprisingly limited number of studies. Goal setting is an elusive process that is of therapeutic value and warrants further investigation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]