The Effectiveness of a Motivational Interviewing Intervention on Mutuality Between Patients With Heart Failure and Their Caregivers: A Secondary Outcome Analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Mutuality, defined as "the positive quality of the relationship between a caregiver and a care receiver", was found to be associated with self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in heart failure (HF). However, no studies were conducted to evaluate whether motivational interviewing (MI) can improve mutuality in patients with HF and caregivers. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of MI on mutuality in HF patient-caregiver dyads. METHODS: This is a secondary outcome analysis of the MOTIVATE-HF randomized controlled trial, the primary aim of which was to evaluate the effect of MI on improving self-care in patients with HF. Participants were randomized into 3 arms: (1) MI for patients only, (2) MI for both patients and caregivers, and (3) standard care. To assess the HF patients' and caregivers' mutuality, the Mutuality Scale was used in its patient and caregiver versions. RESULTS: Patients with HF had a median age of 74 years, and there were more men (58%). Most patients were retired (76.2%). Caregivers had a median age of 55 years and were mostly women (75.5%). Most patients were in New York Heart Association class II (61.9%) and had an ischemic HF etiology (33.6%). The motivational interviews did not show any impact on changes in the patient and caregiver mutuality during the follow-up time (3, 6, 9, and 12 months from baseline). The condition of living together between the patient and the caregiver was significantly associated with better mutuality between the patient and the caregiver. CONCLUSIONS: Motivational interviewing performed by nurses was not effective in improving mutuality in patients with HF and caregivers, but the target variable of the intervention was patient self-care. Stronger effects of MI on mutuality were observed in patients with HF and caregivers who live together. Future studies should target mutuality to see whether MI is really effective.

Remote motivational interviewing to improve patient self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care in heart failure (REMOTIVATE-HF): Rationale, design, and methodology for a multicentre randomized controlled trial.

In patients with heart failure (HF), self-care, and caregiver contribution to self-care (i.e., the daily management of the disease by patients and caregivers) are essential for improving patient outcomes. However, patients and caregivers are often inadequate in their self-care and contribution to self-care, respectively, and struggle to perform related tasks. Face-to-face motivational interviewing (MI) effectively improves self-care and caregiver contribution to self-care, but the evidence on remote MI is scarce and inconclusive. The aims of this randomized controlled trial will be to evaluate whether remote MI performed via video call in patients with HF: (1) is effective at improving self-care maintenance in patients (primary outcome); (2) is effective for the following secondary outcomes: (a) for patients: self-care management, self-care monitoring, and self-efficacy; HF symptoms; generic and disease-specific quality of life; anxiety and depression; use of healthcare services; and mortality; and (b) for caregivers: contribution to self-care, self-efficacy, and preparedness. We will conduct a two-arm randomized controlled trial. We will enroll and randomize 432 dyads (patients and their informal caregivers) in Arm 1, in which patients and caregivers will receive MI or, in Arm 2, standard care. MI will be delivered seven times over 12 months. Outcomes will be assessed at baseline and 3 (primary outcome), 6, 9, and 12 months from enrollment. This trial will demonstrate whether an inexpensive and easily deliverable intervention can improve important HF outcomes. With the restrictions on in-person healthcare professional interventions imposed by the COVID-19 pandemic, it is essential to evaluate whether MI is also effective remotely.

Technology-delivered motivational interviewing to improve health outcomes in patients with chronic conditions: a systematic review of the literature.

AIMS: Provide an overview of remote motivational interviewing (MI) interventions for chronically ill patients, and understand their degree of effectiveness on different health outcomes. METHODS AND RESULTS: A systematic review with meta-analysis was conducted using the following databases: PubMed, CINAHL, PsychInfo, and Web of Science. Eligibility criteria included studies that administered remote MI alone or in combination with other remote approaches. A narrative synthesis and two meta-analyses were performed. Fifteen studies met the inclusion criteria. MI administration almost exclusively occurred by telephone and individual sessions. Eight studies reported treatment fidelity aspects, and four declared adopting a theoretical framework. Most targeted outcomes were therapeutic adherence, physical activity, depression, quality of life, and mortality. Risk of bias varied markedly, with the largest source resulting from selection process and intervention performance. The two meta-analyses indicated a significant effect of MI on depression [standardized mean difference = -0.20, 95% confidence interval (CI): -0.34, -0.05, Z = 2.73, P = 0.006, I2 = 0%], and no effect of MI on glycosylated haemoglobin (mean difference = -0.02, 95% CI: -0.48, 0.45, P = 0.94, I2 = 84%). CONCLUSION: Remote MI can be a promising approach for improving depression in chronic disease patients. However, studies are inconclusive due to risks of bias, heterogeneity, and lack of reporting of interventionist's training, treatment fidelity, and theoretical frameworks' use. More studies with solid designs are needed to inform clinical decision-making and research. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO: CRD42021241516.