Assessing Physician's Motivational Communication Skills: 5-Step Mixed Methods Development Study of the Motivational Communication Competency Assessment Test.

BACKGROUND: Training physicians to provide effective behavior change counseling using approaches such as motivational communication (MC) is an important aspect of noncommunicable chronic disease prevention and management. However, existing evaluation tools for MC skills are complex, invasive, time consuming, and impractical for use within the medical context. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to develop and validate a short web-based tool for evaluating health care provider (HCP) skills in MC-the Motivational Communication Competency Assessment Test (MC-CAT). METHODS: Between 2016 and 2021, starting with a set of 11 previously identified core MC competencies and using a 5-step, mixed methods, integrated knowledge translation approach, the MC-CAT was created by developing a series of 4 base cases and a scoring scheme, validating the base cases and scoring scheme with international experts, creating 3 alternative versions of the 4 base cases (to create a bank of 16 cases, 4 of each type of base case) and translating the cases into French, integrating the cases into the web-based MC-CAT platform, and conducting initial internal validity assessments with university health students. RESULTS: The MC-CAT assesses MC competency in 20 minutes by presenting HCPs with 4 out of a possible 16 cases (randomly selected and ordered) addressing various behavioral targets (eg, smoking, physical activity, diet, and medication adherence). Individual and global competency scores were calculated automatically for the 11 competency items across the 4 cases, providing automatic scores out of 100. From the factorial analysis of variance for the difference in competency and ranking scores, no significant differences were identified between the different case versions across individual and global competency (P=.26 to P=.97) and ranking scores (P=.24 to P=.89). The initial tests of internal consistency for rank order among the 24 student participants were in the acceptable range (α=.78). CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that MC-CAT is an internally valid tool to facilitate the evaluation of MC competencies among HCPs and is ready to undergo comprehensive psychometric property analyses with a national sample of health care providers. Once psychometric property assessments have been completed, this tool is expected to facilitate the assessment of MC skills among HCPs, skills that will better support patients in adopting healthier lifestyles, which will significantly reduce the personal, social, and economic burdens of noncommunicable chronic diseases.

Obesity in adults: a clinical practice guideline

Obesity is a complex chronic disease in which abnormal or excess body fat (adiposity) impairs health, increases the risk of long-term medical complications and reduces lifespan.1 Epidemiologic studies define obesity using the body mass index (BMI; weight/height2), which can stratify obesity-related health risks at the population level. Obesity is operationally defined as a BMI exceeding 30 kg/m2 and is subclassified into class 1 (30­34.9), class 2 (35­39.9) and class 3 (≥ 40). At the population level, health complications from excess body fat increase as BMI increases.2 At the individual level, complications occur because of excess adiposity, location and distribution of adiposity and many other factors, including environmental, genetic, biologic and socioeconomic factors.

Healthcare providers' gestational weight gain counselling practises and the influence of knowledge and attitudes: a cross-sectional mixed methods study.

OBJECTIVE: To understand current gestational weight gain (GWG) counselling practices of healthcare providers, and the relationships between practices, knowledge and attitudes. DESIGN: Concurrent mixed methods with data integration: cross-sectional survey and semistructured interviews. PARTICIPANTS: Prenatal healthcare providers in Canada: general practitioners, obstetricians, midwives, nurse practitioners and registered nurses in primary care settings. RESULTS: Typically, GWG information was provided early in pregnancy, but not discussed again unless there was a concern. Few routinely provided women with individualised GWG advice (21%), rate of GWG (16%) or discussed the risks of inappropriate GWG to mother and baby (20% and 19%). More routinely discussed physical activity (46%) and food requirements (28%); midwives did these two activities more frequently than all other disciplines (P<0.001). Midwives interviewed noted a focus on overall wellness instead of weight, and had longer appointment times which allowed them to provide more in-depth counselling. Regression results identified that the higher priority level that healthcare providers place on GWG, the more likely they were to report providing GWG advice and discussing risks of GWG outside recommendations (ß=0.71, P<0.001) and discussing physical activity and food requirements (ß=0.341, P<0.001). Interview data linked the priority level of GWG to length of appointments, financial compensation methods for healthcare providers and the midwifery versus medical model of care. CONCLUSIONS: Interventions for healthcare providers to enhance GWG counselling practices should consider the range of factors that influence the priority level healthcare providers place on GWG counselling.