Which outcomes are most important to people with aphasia and their families? An international nominal group technique study framed within the ICF

Wallace, Sarah J., Worrall, Linda, Rose, Tanya, Le Dorze, Guylaine, Cruice, Madeline, Isaksen, Jytte, Pak Hin Kong, Anthony, Simmons-Mackie, Nina, Scarinci, Nerina and Alary Gauvreau, Christine (2016) Which outcomes are most important to people with aphasia and their families? An international nominal group technique study framed within the ICF. Disability and Rehabilitation, 1-16. doi:10.1080/09638288.2016.1194899


Author Wallace, Sarah J.
Worrall, Linda
Rose, Tanya
Le Dorze, Guylaine
Cruice, Madeline
Isaksen, Jytte
Pak Hin Kong, Anthony
Simmons-Mackie, Nina
Scarinci, Nerina
Alary Gauvreau, Christine
Title Which outcomes are most important to people with aphasia and their families? An international nominal group technique study framed within the ICF
Journal name Disability and Rehabilitation   Check publisher's open access policy
ISSN 0963-8288
1464-5165
Publication date 2016-06-10
Year available 2016
Sub-type Article (original research)
DOI 10.1080/09638288.2016.1194899
Open Access Status Not Open Access
Start page 1
End page 16
Total pages 16
Place of publication Abingdon, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom
Publisher Taylor & Francis
Collection year 2017
Language eng
Formatted abstract
Purpose: To identify important treatment outcomes from the perspective of people with aphasia and their families using the ICF as a frame of reference.

Methods: The nominal group technique was used with people with aphasia and their family members in seven countries to identify and rank important treatment outcomes from aphasia rehabilitation. People with aphasia identified outcomes for themselves; and family members identified outcomes for themselves and for the person with aphasia. Outcomes were analysed using qualitative content analysis and ICF linking.

Results: A total of 39 people with aphasia and 29 family members participated in one of 16 nominal groups. Inductive qualitative content analysis revealed the following six themes: (1) Improved communication; (2) Increased life participation; (3) Changed attitudes through increased awareness and education about aphasia; (4) Recovered normality; (5) Improved physical and emotional well-being; and (6) Improved health (and support) services. Prioritized outcomes for both participant groups linked to all ICF components; primary activity/participation (39%) and body functions (36%) for people with aphasia, and activity/participation (49%) and environmental factors (28%) for family members. Outcomes prioritized by family members relating to the person with aphasia, primarily linked to body functions (60%).

Conclusions: People with aphasia and their families identified treatment outcomes which span all components of the ICF. This has implications for research outcome measurement and clinical service provision which currently focuses on the measurement of body function outcomes. The wide range of desired outcomes generated by both people with aphasia and their family members, highlights the importance of collaborative goal setting within a family-centred approach to rehabilitation. These results will be combined with other stakeholder perspectives to establish a core outcome set for aphasia treatment research.

Implications for Rehabilitation
• Important outcomes for people with aphasia and their families span all components of the ICF.
• The relevancy and translation of research findings may be increased by measuring and reporting research outcomes which are important to people living with aphasia.
• The results of this study indicate that important treatment outcomes for people living with aphasia most frequently link to the activity/participation and body function components of the ICF.
• The outcomes identified in this study suggest a broad role for clinicians working in aphasia rehabilitation. The categories of identified outcomes may be used clinically as a starting point in goal-setting discussions with clients and their families.
Q-Index Code C1
Q-Index Status Provisional Code
Institutional Status UQ

Document type: Journal Article
Sub-type: Article (original research)
Collections: HERDC Pre-Audit
School of Health and Rehabilitation Sciences Publications
 
Versions
Version Filter Type
Citation counts: Scopus Citation Count Cited 0 times in Scopus Article
Google Scholar Search Google Scholar
Created: Wed, 06 Jul 2016, 18:04:38 EST by Sarah Wallace on behalf of School of Health & Rehabilitation Sciences