Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Appears in Collections:Faculty of Health Sciences and Sport Journal Articles
Peer Review Status: Refereed
Title: Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL): mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma
Author(s): Hoskins, Gaylor
Williams, Brian
Abhyankar, Purva
Donnan, Peter
Duncan, Edward
Pinnock, Hilary
van der Pol, Marjon
Rauchhaus, Petra
Taylor, Anne
Sheikh, Aziz
Contact Email:
Keywords: Asthma
Complex interventions
Goal setting
Mixed methods
Pilot cluster RCT
Issue Date: 8-Dec-2016
Date Deposited: 10-Nov-2016
Citation: Hoskins G, Williams B, Abhyankar P, Donnan P, Duncan E, Pinnock H, van der Pol M, Rauchhaus P, Taylor A & Sheikh A (2016) Achieving Good Outcomes for Asthma Living (GOAL): mixed methods feasibility and pilot cluster randomised controlled trial of a practical intervention for eliciting, setting and achieving goals for adults with asthma. Trials, 17 (1), Art. No.: 584.
Abstract: Background/aims  Despite being a core component of self-management, goal setting is rarely used in routine care. We piloted a primary care, nurse-led intervention (GOAL) for adults with asthma. Patients were invited to identify and prioritise their goals in preparation for discussing and negotiating an action/coping plan with the nurse at a routine asthma review.  Methods  The 18-month mixed-methods feasibility cluster pilot trial stratified then randomised practices to deliver usual care (UC) or a goal-setting intervention (GOAL). Practice asthma nurses and adult patients with active asthma were invited to participate. Primary outcome was asthma-specific quality-of-life. Semi-structured interviews with a purposive patient sample (n=14) and 10 participating nurses explored GOAL perception. The constructs of Normalization Process Theory (NPT) were used to analyse and interpret data.  Results  Ten practices participated (5 in each arm) exceeding our target of eight. However, only 48 patients (target 80) were recruited (18 in GOAL practices). At six months post-intervention, the difference in mean asthma-related quality-of-life (mini-AQLQ) between intervention and control was 0.1 [GOAL 6.20: SD 0.76(CI 5.76–6.65) versus UC 6.1: SD 0.81(CI 5.63–6.57)], less than the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 0.5. However, change from baseline was stronger in the intervention group: at six months the change in the emotions sub-score was 0.8 for intervention versus 0.2 for control. Costs were higher in the intervention group by £22.17.  Routine review with goal-setting was considered more holistic, enhancing rapport and enabling patients to become active rather than passive participants in healthcare. However, time was a major barrier for nurses who admitted screening-out patient goals they believed were unrelated to asthma.  Conclusions  The difference in AQLQ score from baseline is larger in the intervention arm than the control, indicating the intervention may have impact if appropriately strengthened. The GOAL intervention changed the review dynamic and was well received by patients, but necessitated additional time, which was problematic in the confines of the traditional nurse appointment. Modification to recruitment methods and further development of the intervention are needed before proceeding to a definitive cluster randomised controlled trial.  The trial was registered on the ISRCTN register (ISRCTN 18912042) on 26th June 2012.
DOI Link: 10.1186/s13063-016-1684-7
Rights: This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Licence URL(s):

Files in This Item:
File Description SizeFormat 
art3A10.11862Fs13063-016-1684-7.pdfFulltext - Published Version884.71 kBAdobe PDFView/Open

This item is protected by original copyright

A file in this item is licensed under a Creative Commons License Creative Commons

Items in the Repository are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.

The metadata of the records in the Repository are available under the CC0 public domain dedication: No Rights Reserved

If you believe that any material held in STORRE infringes copyright, please contact providing details and we will remove the Work from public display in STORRE and investigate your claim.