# Goal Setting and Attainment in a Randomised Controlled Trial of Digital Health-Assisted Lifestyle Interventions in People with Kidney and Liver Disease

## TL;DR

This study explored how goal setting and digital health tools affect lifestyle improvements in people with kidney or liver disease, finding that most participants improved their goals, especially in diet.

## Contribution

The study demonstrates the feasibility of using goal attainment scales and self-efficacy in lifestyle interventions for people with chronic disease.

## Key findings

- Most participants reported improvements in lifestyle goals, particularly in dietary goals.
- Nutrition self-efficacy was significantly correlated with dietary goal achievement.
- There was no significant difference in goal outcomes between the digital health intervention and standard care groups.

## Abstract

Introduction: Goal setting is an effective strategy in altering fitness and dietary behaviours. The goal attainment scale (GAS) is a patient-reported outcome measure that can be used to quantify goal achievement. The GAS has not been extensively assessed in lifestyle intervention trials. This study aimed to describe the goal setting process and assess the impact of a digital exercise and diet service and self-efficacy on goal attainment in people with chronic disease and at increased cardiometabolic risk. Methods: This study presents a single-centre, 26-week, randomised controlled trial (RCT) comparing standard care to digital health technologies (text messages, nutrition/exercise app, video consultations with dietitian and/or exercise physiologist). The comparator group was offered dietitian review (per standard care), and both groups received a wearable activity monitor. Individualised goal setting was facilitated prior to randomisation. Goal importance, performance measures, and self-efficacy were determined by participants. Goal outcome and ‘Change in GAS’ scores, reflecting the difference between baseline and follow-up performance, were calculated using validated formulae. Results: Goal setting was completed and reviewed by 66 participants, with a median age of 51 years and 56% being male. The most common goals related to weight loss (46%), fitness (29%), and diet (15%). Most participants (62%) reported improvements in their goals, with most improvements in dietary (71%), fitness (52%), and weight loss (39%) goals. There was no significant difference in goal outcomes between intervention and comparator groups (p = 0.99). There was, however, a significant correlation between nutrition self-efficacy and dietary goal achievement (p = 0.04). Conclusions: The novelty and feasibility of goal setting and attainment were demonstrated in this RCT of lifestyle interventions in people with chronic disease. Though the intervention did not significantly improve goal attainment, most participants reported improvements in their lifestyle goals. There were greater improvements in dietary goals than in fitness or weight loss goals. Participant-led goal setting with GAS and participant self-efficacy has potentially important applications in future lifestyle modification research and clinical implementation endeavours.