A scoping review to identify process and outcome measures used in acceptance and commitment therapy research, with adults with acquired neurological conditions

Foote, Hannah ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1929-4139, Bowen, Audrey ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4075-1215, Cotterill, Sarah, Hill, Geoff, Pieri, Matilde and Patchwood, Emma ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4198-5761 (2023) A scoping review to identify process and outcome measures used in acceptance and commitment therapy research, with adults with acquired neurological conditions. Clinical Rehabilitation, 37 (6). pp. 808-835. ISSN 0269-2155

Preview

Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (1MB) | Preview

Abstract

Background: Acceptance and Commitment Therapy interventions are increasing in use in neurological populations. There is a lack of information on the measures available. Purpose: To identify and classify the measures used in Acceptance and Commitment Therapy research studies with adults with acquired neurological conditions. Methods: PRISMA-ScR guided scoping review. MEDLINE, PsycInfo and CINAHL databases searched (up to date 29/06/2022) with forward and backward searching. All study types included. Extraction of Acceptance and Commitment Therapy process-of-change and health-related outcome measures. Outcomes coded using the Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (COMET) taxonomy. Results: Three hundred and thirty three papers found on searching. Fifty four studies included and 136 measurement tools extracted. Conditions included multiple sclerosis, traumatic brain injury and stroke. Thirty-eight studies measured processes of change, with 32 measures extracted. The process measure most often used was the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire (n = 21 studies). One hundred and four health-related outcome measures extracted. Measures exploring quality of life, health status, anxiety and depression occurred most frequently, and were used in all included neurological conditions. COMET domains most frequently coded were emotional functioning/well-being (n = 50), physical functioning (n = 32), role functioning (n = 22) and psychiatric (n = 22). Conclusions: This study provides a resource to support future identification of candidate measures. This could aid development of a Core Outcome Set to support both research and clinical practice. Further research to identify the most appropriate and relevant targets and tools for use in these populations should include expert consensus, patient, carer and public involvement and psychometric examination of measures.