The three objectives of this scoping review were to (1) identify key conceptual/theoretical frameworks and the extent to which they are used to inform goal setting related to rehabilitation goal setting with children with motor disabilities, (2) describe research that has evaluated goal setting processes and outcomes, and (3) summarize the purposes of goal setting described in paediatric rehabilitation literature.
Methods:
The scoping review process described by Arksey and O’Malley was used to guide article selection and data extraction.
Results:
A total of 62 articles were included in the final review. While the concept of family-centered care was well represented, theoretical frameworks specific to goal setting (i.e. goal setting theory described by Locke and Latham, mastery motivation, social cognitive, personal construct, and self-determination theories) were rarely addressed. No articles reviewed addressed prominent behavior change theory. With the exception of the description of tools specifically designed for use with children, the role of the child in the goal setting process was generally absent or not well described. Few studies (n = 6) discussed the linkage between goals and intervention strategies explicitly. Only two studies in the review evaluated outcomes associated with goal setting. The primary purpose for goal setting identified in the literature was to develop goals that are meaningful to families (n = 49).
Conclusion:
The results highlight significant gaps in the literature explicating a sound theoretical basis for goal setting in paediatric rehabilitation and research evaluating the effects of goal qualities and goal setting processes on the achievement of meaningful outcomes.
WiartL. Goal setting in pediatric rehabilitation. In: SiegertRJLevackWMM (eds) Rehabilitation goal setting: theory, practice and evidence. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2015, pp.291–304.
2.
KangLJPalisanoRJKingGAet al. A multidimensional model of optimal participation of children with physical disabilities. Disabil Rehabil2014; 36: 1735–1741.
3.
Shikako-ThomasKShevellMLachLet al. Determinants of participation in leisure activities among adolescents with cerebral palsy. Res Dev Disabil2013; 34: 2621–2634.
4.
DarrahJWiartLMagill-EvansJet al. Are family-centred principles, functional goal setting and transition planning evident in therapy services for children with cerebral palsy?Child Care Health Dev2012; 38: 41–47.
5.
NijhuisBJGReinders-MesselinkHAde BlécourtACEet al. Needs, problems and rehabilitation goals of young children with cerebral palsy as formulated in the rehabilitation activities profile for children. J Rehabil Med2008; 40: 347–354.
6.
WiartLRayLDarrahJet al. Parents’ perspectives on occupational therapy and physical therapy goals for children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil2010; 32: 248–258.
7.
ScobbieLDixonDWykeS. Goal setting and action planning in the rehabilitation setting: development of a theoretically informed practice framework. Clin Rehabil2011; 25: 468–482.
8.
BrewerKPollockNWrightV. Addressing the challenges of collaborative goal setting with children and their families. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr2014; 34: 138–152.
9.
TamCTeachmanGWrightV. Paediatric application of individualized client-centred outcome measures: a literature review. Brit J Occup Ther2008; 71: 286–296.
10.
ArkseyHO’MalleyL. Scoping studies: towards a methodological framework. Int J Soc Res Method2005; 8: 19–32.
11.
LevackWMMDeanSGSiegertRJet al. Purposes and mechanisms of goal planning in rehabilitation: the need for a critical distinction. Disabil Rehabil2006; 28: 741–749.
12.
RosenCMillerACPit-ten CateIMet al. Team approaches to treating children with disabilities: a comparison. Arch Phys Med Rehabil1998; 79: 430–434.
13.
BermanSMillerACRosenCet al. Assessment training and team functioning for treating children with disabilities. Arch Phys Med Rehabil2000; 81: 628–633.
14.
McGavinH. Planning rehabilitation: a comparison of issues for parents and adolescents. Phys Occup Ther Pedi1998; 18: 69–82.
15.
Vroland-NordstrandKEliassonACJacobssonHet al. Can children identify and achieve goals for intervention? A randomized trial comparing two goal-setting approaches. Dev Med Child Neurol2016; 58: 589–596.
16.
Vroland-NordstrandKKrumlinde-SundholmL. The Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS), part I: translation and cross-cultural adaptation to a Swedish context. Scand J Occup Ther2012; 19: 497–505.
17.
NijhuisBJGReinders-MesselinkHAde BlécourtACEet al. Goal setting in Dutch paediatric rehabilitation. Are the Needs and Principal Problems of Children with Cerebral Palsy Integrated into Their Rehabilitation Goals?Clin Rehabil2008; 22: 348–363.
18.
LöwingKBexeliusABrogren CarlbergE. Activity focused and goal directed therapy for children with cerebral palsy—do goals make a difference?Disabil Rehabil2009; 31: 1808–1816.
19.
EngelenVKetelaarMGorterJW. Selecting the appropriate outcome in paediatric physical therapy: how individual treatment goals for children with cerebral palsy are reflected in GMFM-88 and PEDI. J Rehabil Med2007; 39: 225–231.
20.
ØstensjøSØienIFallangB. Goal-oriented rehabilitation of preschoolers with cerebral palsy—a multi-case study of combined use of the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure (COPM) and the Goal Attainment Scaling (GAS). Dev Neurorehabil2008; 11: 252–259.
21.
CusickALanninNALoweK. Adapting the Canadian occupational performance measure for use in a paediatric clinical trial. Disabil Rehabil2007; 29: 761–766.
22.
SteenbeekDGorterJWKetelaarMet al. Responsiveness of goal attainment scaling in comparison to two standardized measures in outcome evaluation of children with cerebral palsy. Clin Rehabil2011; 25: 1128–1139.
23.
CusickAMcIntyreSNovakIet al. A comparison of goal attainment scaling and the Canadian Occupational Performance Measure for paediatric rehabilitation research. Pediatr Rehabil2006; 9: 149–157.
24.
CermakSABissellJ. Content and construct validity of Here’s How I Write (HHIW): a child’s self-assessment and goal setting tool. Am J Occup Ther2014; 68: 296–306.
25.
FrankiIDe CatJDeschepperEet al. A clinical decision framework for the identification of main problems and treatment goals for ambulant children with bilateral spastic cerebral palsy. Res Dev Disabil2014; 35: 1160–1176.
26.
McConlogueAQuinnL. Analysis of physical therapy goals in a school-based setting: a pilot study. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr2009; 29: 154–169.
27.
ChiarelloLAPalisanoRJMaggsJMet al. Family priorities for activity and participation of children and youth with cerebral palsy. Phys Ther2010; 90: 1254–1264.
28.
LemmensRJMJanssen-PottenYJMTimmermansAAAet al. Arm hand skilled performance in cerebral palsy: activity preferences and their movement components. BMC Neurol2014; 14.
29.
LowingKHamerEGBexeliusAet al. Exploring the relationship of family goals and scores on standardized measures in children with cerebral palsy, using the ICF-CY. Dev Neurorehabil2011; 14: 79–86.
30.
BrandãoMBOliveiraRHSManciniMC. Functional priorities reported by parents of children with cerebral palsy: contribution to the pediatric rehabilitation process. Braz J Phys Ther2014; 18: 563–571.
31.
PollockNSharmaNChristensonCet al. Change in parent-identified goals in young children with cerebral palsy receiving a context-focused intervention: associations with child, goal and intervention factors. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr2014; 34: 62–74.
32.
LöwingKBexeliusACarlbergEB. Goal-directed functional therapy: a longitudinal study on gross motor function in children with cerebral palsy. Disabil Rehabil2010; 32: 908–916.
33.
Vroland-NordstrandKKrumlinde-SundholmL. The Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS), Part II: evaluation of test-retest reliability and differences between child and parental reports in the Swedish version. Scand J Occup Ther2012; 19: 506–514.
34.
MissiunaCPollockNLawMet al. Examination of the Perceived Efficacy and Goal Setting System (PEGS) with children with disabilities, their parents, and teachers. Am J Occup Ther2006; 60: 204–214.
35.
JeglinskyIBrogren CarlbergEAutti-RämöI. How are actual needs recognized in the content and goals of written rehabilitation plans?Disabil Rehabil2014; 36: 441–451.
36.
MissiunaCPollockN. Perceived efficacy and goal setting in young children. Can J Occup Ther2000; 67: 101–109.
37.
SiebesRCKetelaarMGorterJWet al. Transparency and tuning of rehabilitation care for children with cerebral palsy: a multiple case study in five children with complex needs. Dev Neurorehabil2007; 10: 193–204.
38.
SteenbeekDKetelaarMGalamaKet al. Goal Attainment Scaling in paediatric rehabilitation: a report on the clinical training of an interdisciplinary team. Child Care Health Dev2008; 34: 521–529.
39.
SiebesRCWijnroksLKetelaarMet al. Parent participation in paediatric rehabilitation treatment centres in the Netherlands: a parents’ viewpoint. Child Care Health Dev2007; 33: 196–205.
40.
KnoxV. Do parents of children with cerebral palsy express different concerns in relation to their child’s type of cerebral palsy, age and level of disability?Physiotherapy2008; 94: 56–62.
41.
AnMPalisanoRJYiCHet al. Effects of a collaborative intervention process on parent empowerment and child performance: a randomized controlled trial. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr. Epub ahead of print 20September2017. DOI: 10.1080/01942638.2017.1365324.
42.
Krasny-PaciniAPaulyFHiebelJet al. Feasibility of a shorter Goal Attainment Scaling method for a pediatric spasticity clinic—the 3-milestones GAS. Ann Phys Rehabil Med2017; 60: 249–257.
43.
RobertsonCMTDeforgeSMDosmanCF. Goal setting within a tertiary-level early developmental intervention program. Paediatr Child Healt2017; 22: 184–189.
44.
ÖdmanPKreversBÖbergB. Parents’ perceptions of the quality of two intensive training programmes for children with cerebral palsy. Dev Med Child Neurol2007; 49: 93–100.
45.
KolehmainenNDuncanEMcKeeLet al. Mothers’ perceptions of their children’s occupational therapy processes: a qualitative interview study. Brit J Occup Ther2010; 73: 192–199.
46.
JeglinskyISalminenALCarlbergEBet al. Rehabilitation planning for children and adolescents with cerebral palsy. J Pediatr Rehabil Med2012; 5: 203–215.
47.
ØienIFallangBØstensjøS. Goal-setting in paediatric rehabilitation: perceptions of parents and professional. Child Care Health Dev2010; 36: 558–565.
48.
RoelofsenEELankhorstGJBouterLM. Simultaneous development and implementation of the children’s rehabilitation activities profile: a communication instrument for pediatric rehabilitation. Disabil Rehabil2001; 23: 614–622.
49.
ForsingdalSSt JohnWMillerVet al. Goal setting with mothers in child development services. Child Care Health Dev2014; 40: 587–596.
50.
SmartEAulakhAMcDougallCet al. Optimizing engagement in goal pursuit with youth with physical disabilities attending life skills and transition programs: an exploratory study. Disabil Rehabil2017; 39: 2029–2038.
51.
KingGSchwellnusHServaisMet al. Solution-focused coaching in pediatric rehabilitation: investigating transformative experiences and outcomes for families. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr2017; 1–17.
52.
AnMPalisanoRJDunstCJet al. Strategies to promote family-professional collaboration: two case reports. Disabil Rehabil2016; 38: 1844–1858.
53.
DalenHENyquistASaebuMet al. Implementation of ICF in goal setting in rehabilitation of children with chronic disabilities at Beitostolen Healthsports Centre. Disabil Rehabil2013; 35: 198–205.
54.
KolehmainenNMacLennanGTernentLet al. Using shared goal setting to improve access and equity: a mixed methods study of the Good Goals intervention in children’s occupational therapy. Implementation Science2012; 7.
55.
DarrahJWiartLMagill-EvansJ. Do therapists’ goals and interventions for children with cerebral palsy reflect principles in contemporary literature?Pediatr Phys Ther2008; 20: 334–339.
56.
StefánsdóttirSThóra EgilsonS. Diverging perspectives on children’s rehabilitation services: a mixed-methods study. Scand J Occup Ther2016; 23: 374–382.
57.
CostaUMBrauchleGKennedy-BehrA. Collaborative goal setting with and for children as part of therapeutic intervention. Disabil Rehabil2017; 39: 1589–1600.
58.
BaldwinPKingGEvansJet al. Solution-focused coaching in pediatric rehabilitation: an integrated model for practice. Phys Occup Ther Pediatr2013; 33: 467–483.
59.
McDougallJWrightV. The ICF-CY and goal attainment scaling: benefits of their combined use for pediatric practice. Disabil Rehabil2009; 31: 1362–1372.
60.
KingGMcDougallJPalisanoRet al. Goal attainment scaling: its use in evaluating pediatric therapy programs. Phys Occup Ther Pedi1999; 15: 31–52.
61.
PalisanoRJ. Whose goals and outcomes are they?Phys Occup Ther Pedi2014; 34: 1–3.
62.
NijhuisBJGReinders-MesselinkHAde BlécourtACEet al. A review of salient elements defining team collaboration in paediatric rehabilitation. Clin Rehabil2007; 21: 195–211.
63.
PoulsenAAZivianiJKotaniemiKet al. “I think I can”: measuring confidence in goal pursuit. Brit J Occup Ther2014; 77: 64–66.
64.
WrightFVMajnemerA. The concept of a toolbox of outcome measures for children with cerebral palsy: why, what, and how to use?J Child Neurol2014; 29: 1055–1065.
65.
AnMPalisanoRJ. Family-professional collaboration in pediatric rehabilitation: a practice model. Disabil Rehabil2014; 36: 434–440.
66.
PalisanoRJChiarelloLAKingGAet al. Participation-based therapy for children with physical disabilities. Disabil Rehabil2012; 34: 1041–1052.
67.
KingGWrightVRussellDJ. Understanding paediatric rehabilitation therapists’ lack of use of outcome measures. Disabil Rehabil2011; 33: 2667–2671.
68.
Cooper-DuffyKEakerK. Effective team practices: interprofessional contributions to communication issues with a parent’s perspective. Am J Speech Lang Pathol2017; 26: 181–192.
69.
LockeEALathamGP. New directions in goal-setting theory. Curr Dir Psychol Sci2006; 15: 265–268.
70.
SchwarzerRLippkeSLuszczynskaA. Mechanisms of health behavior change in persons with chronic illness or disability: the health action process approach (HAPA). Rehabil Psychol2011; 56: 161–170.
71.
OdmanPEObergBE. Effectiveness and expectations of intensive training: a comparison between child and youth rehabilitation and conductive education. Disabil Rehabil2006; 28: 561–570.
72.
SiegertRJO’ConnellCLevackWMM. Psychology, goals and rehabilitation: providing a theoretical foundation. In: SiegertRJO’ConnellCLevackWMM (eds) Rehabilitation goal setting: theory, practice and evidence. Boca Raton, FL: CRC Press, 2015, pp.45–65.
73.
RyanRMDeciEL. Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. Am Psychol2000; 55: 68–78.
74.
NovakICusickA. Home programmes in paediatric occupational therapy for children with cerebral palsy: where to start?Aust Occup Ther J2006; 53: 251–264.
75.
KetelaarMVermeerAHartHtPetegem-van BeekEet al. Effects of a functional therapy program on motor abilities of children with cerebral palsy. Phys Ther2001; 81: 1534–1545.
76.
LawMDarrahJPollockNet al. Focus on Function—a randomized controlled trial comparing two rehabilitation interventions for young children with cerebral palsy. BMC Pediatr2007; 7: 31.
77.
LemosAWulfGLewthwaiteRet al. Autonomy support enhances performance expectancies, positive affect, and motor learning. Psychol Sport Exerc2017; 31: 28–34.
78.
SandersGJJuvancic-HeltzelJWilliamsonMLet al. The effect of increasing autonomy through choice on young children’s physical activity behavior. J Phys Act Health2016; 13: 428–432.
79.
PlantSETysonSFKirkSet al. What are the barriers and facilitators to goal-setting during rehabilitation for stroke and other acquired brain injuries? A systematic review and meta-synthesis. Clin Rehabil2016; 30: 921–930.
80.
Wray-LakeLCrouterACMcHaleSM. Developmental patterns in decision-making autonomy across middle childhood and adolescence: European American parents’ perspectives. Child Dev2010; 81: 636–651.
81.
DeciELEghrariHPatrickBCet al. Facilitating internalization: the self-determination theory perspective. J Pers1994; 62: 119–142.
82.
Côté-LecaldareMJoussemetMDufourS. How to support toddlers’ autonomy: a qualitative study with child care educators. Early Educ Dev2016; 27: 822–840.
83.
LundyLMcEvoyL. Children’s rights and research processes: assisting children to (in)formed views. Childhood2012; 19: 129–144.
84.
PowellMASmithAB. Children’s participation rights in research. Childhood2009; 16: 124–142.
85.
JonesP. Rethinking childhood: attitudes in contemporary society. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group, 2009.
ProutA. The future of childhood. London: RoutledgeFalmer, 2005.
88.
GibsonBETeachmanGWrightVet al. Children’s and parent’s beliefs regarding the value of walking: rehabilitation implications for children with cerebral palsy. Child Care Health Dev2012; 38: 61–69.
89.
PhelanSKGibsonBEWrightFV. What is it like to walk with the help of a robot? Children’s perspectives on robotic gait training technology. Disabil Rehabil2015; 37: 2272–2281.
90.
TeachmanGGibsonBE. Children and youth with disabilities: innovative methods for single qualitative interviews. Qual Health Res2013; 23: 264–274.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
