Booklet and Motivational Interviewing to Promote Self-efficacy in Parents/Caregivers of Children with Asthma: A Clinical Trial.

Background: Asthma is the most common chronic disease in childhood which accounts for numerous annual hospitalizations due to a lack of management and proper management of the disease. Thus, this study aimed to evaluate the effect of using an educational booklet with or without combination with motivational interviewing (MI) on the self-efficacy of parents/caregivers in the control and management of childhood asthma. Methods: A clinical trial was carried out with 86 parents/caregivers of children with asthma aged between 2 and 12 years who were followed up in primary health care units from March 2019 to December 2020. Participants were randomly assigned to two groups: one of the groups read the booklet and the other read the booklet combined with the MI. The Brazilian version of the Self-Efficacy and Their Child's Level of Asthma Control scale was applied before and 30 days after the intervention for assessment of self-efficacy. Data were analyzed using SPSS version 20.0 and R 3.6.3 software. P values<0.05 were considered significant. Results: There were 46 participants in the booklet group and 40 in the booklet and MI group. Both groups were effective in increasing total self-efficacy scores after the intervention (P<0.001). No statistically significant difference was found between the scores of the two groups (P=0.257). Conclusion: The educational booklet with or without combination with MI can increase the self-efficacy of parents/caregivers of children with asthma. The findings could be considered by healthcare providers for the empowerment of caregivers of children with asthma in the control and management of their children's asthma.Trial Registration Number: U1111-1254-7256.

Acceptability of a pilot motivational interviewing intervention at public health facilities to improve the HIV treatment cascade among people who inject drugs in Indonesia.

BACKGROUND: HIV-positive people who inject drugs (PWID) experience challenges in initiating and adhering to antiretroviral treatment (ART). Counselling using motivational interviewing (MI) techniques may help them formulate individualised strategies, and execute actions to address these challenges collaboratively with their providers. We evaluated the acceptability of MI from a pilot implementation at three public health facilities in Indonesia. METHODS: Adapting the acceptability constructs developed by Sekhon (2017) we assessed the acceptability to HIV-positive PWID clients (n = 12) and providers (n = 10) in four synthesised constructs: motivation (attributes that inspire engagement); cost consideration (sacrifices made to engage in MI); learned understanding (mechanism of action); and outcomes (ability to effect change with engagement). We included all providers and clients who completed ≥ 2 MI encounters. Qualitative analysis with an interpretive paradigm was used to extract and categorise themes by these constructs. RESULTS: In motivation, clients valued the open communication style of MI, while providers appreciated its novelty in offering coherent structure with clear boundaries. In cost consideration, both groups faced a challenge in meeting MI encounters due to access or engagement in other health care areas. In learned understanding, clients understood that MI worked to identify problematic areas of life amenable to change to support long-term ART, with reconciliation in family life being the most targeted change. By contrast, providers preferred targeting tangible health outcomes to such behavioural proxies. In outcomes, clients were confident in their ability to develop behaviours to sustain ART uptakes, whereas providers doubted the outcome of MI on younger PWID or those with severe dependence. CONCLUSIONS: There is broad acceptability of MI in motivating engagement for both actors. Relative to providers, clients were more acceptable in its mechanism and had greater confidence to perform behaviours conducive to ART engagement. Design innovations to improve the acceptability of MI for both actors are needed.

Behavioral Therapy for People With Diabetes Who Smoke: A Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Tobacco smoking exacerbates diabetes-related complications; its prevalence is notwithstanding substantial. Persons with diabetes face a number of barriers and challenges to quitting such as multiple lifestyle restrictions; tailored interventions are required for smoking cessation. OBJECTIVE: To identify research on behavioral interventions for smoking cessation in diabetes. METHODS: Studies had to be randomized controlled trials, quasiexperimental or systematic reviews. The behavioral interventions included were: the 5As, Cognitive-Behavioral Therapy, Motivational Interviewing, Contingency Management, Health Coaching and Counselling, as compared to standard care. The outcomes were self-reported and/or biochemically verified smoking cessation. CINAHL Complete, MEDLINE Complete, the Cochrane databases of systematic reviews and randomized controlled trials, PsychInfo and PubMed Central were searched until July, 2023. Keywords used included diabetes, smoking cessation and each of the behavioral interventions included. RESULTS: 1615 papers were identified. Three studies on the 5As/brief advice, 4 on Motivational Intervention and 1 on counseling were retained. The results on the 5As and Motivational Interviewing were conflicting. More intensive interventions appear to be more successful in achieving smoking cessation in smokers with diabetes. CONCLUSIONS: Future research should focus on the continued development and evaluation of structured smoking cessation interventions based on the 5As, Motivational interviewing and Cognitive Behavioral Therapy.

Preliminary evaluation of a novel group-based motivational interviewing intervention with adolescents: a feasibility study.

Drinking is closely intertwined with social life among many adolescents, particularly in Europe. Group-based interventions, such as group-based motivational interviewing (group MI), have shown the capacity to prevent and reduce hazardous drinking and related problems among adolescents, but few examinations have been conducted in a European high school setting. This study examines the preliminary outcomes of a pilot group MI intervention among Danish adolescents. High school students (ages 15-18 years) were randomly allocated to two 1-h group MI sessions delivered in a school setting (N = 65) or an assessment only control condition (N = 67). Data were collected in August and November 2020 using online self-administrated questionnaires regarding the acceptability of the intervention and past month alcohol use. The pilot group MI intervention showed high feasibility and acceptability in this setting and with this age group. Group MI adolescents significantly reduced peak drinks per drinking day compared to assessment only adolescents (-2.7 drinks, p < 0.05). Results are discussed in relation to the metrics being evaluated during COVID-19 lockdown, including increased social restrictions at follow-up compared to baseline. Group MI shows promise for reducing hazardous alcohol use among Danish adolescents. In addition, the findings indicate the importance of building on and extending this work in future larger, better-powered randomized controlled trials.

Psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder.

BACKGROUND: Stimulant use disorder is a continuously growing medical and social burden without approved medications available for its treatment. Psychosocial interventions could be a valid approach to help people reduce or cease stimulant consumption. This is an update of a Cochrane review first published in 2016. OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of psychosocial interventions for stimulant use disorder in adults. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Drugs and Alcohol Group Specialised Register, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, three other databases, and two trials registers in September 2023. All searches included non-English language literature. We handsearched the references of topic-related systematic reviews and the included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) comparing any psychosocial intervention with no intervention, treatment as usual (TAU), or a different intervention in adults with stimulant use disorder. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used the standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. MAIN RESULTS: We included a total of 64 RCTs (8241 participants). Seventy-three percent of studies included participants with cocaine or crack cocaine use disorder; 3.1% included participants with amphetamine use disorder; 10.9% included participants with methamphetamine use disorder; and 12.5% included participants with any stimulant use disorder. In 18 studies, all participants were in methadone maintenance treatment. In our primary comparison of any psychosocial treatment to no intervention, we included studies which compared a psychosocial intervention plus TAU to TAU alone. In this comparison, 12 studies evaluated cognitive behavioural therapy (CBT), 27 contingency management, three motivational interviewing, one study looked at psychodynamic therapy, and one study evaluated CBT plus contingency management. We also compared any psychosocial intervention to TAU. In this comparison, seven studies evaluated CBT, two contingency management, two motivational interviewing, and one evaluated a combination of CBT plus motivational interviewing. Seven studies compared contingency management reinforcement related to abstinence versus contingency management not related to abstinence. Finally, seven studies compared two different psychosocial approaches. We judged 65.6% of the studies to be at low risk of bias for random sequence generation and 19% at low risk for allocation concealment. Blinding of personnel and participants was not possible for the type of intervention, so we judged all the studies to be at high risk of performance bias for subjective outcomes but at low risk for objective outcomes. We judged 22% of the studies to be at low risk of detection bias for subjective outcomes. We judged most of the studies (69%) to be at low risk of attrition bias. When compared to no intervention, we found that psychosocial treatments: reduce the dropout rate (risk ratio (RR) 0.82, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.74 to 0.91; 30 studies, 4078 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.15, 95% CI 0.94 to 1.41; 12 studies, 1293 participants; high-certainty evidence); make little to no difference to point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.22, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.62; 9 studies, 1187 participants; high-certainty evidence); probably increase continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.89, 95% CI 1.20 to 2.97; 12 studies, 1770 participants; moderate-certainty evidence); may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.14, 95% CI 0.89 to 1.46; 4 studies, 295 participants; low-certainty evidence); reduce the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.35, 95% CI -0.50 to -0.19; 10 studies, 1215 participants; high-certainty evidence); and increase the longest period of abstinence (SMD 0.54, 95% CI 0.41 to 0.68; 17 studies, 2118 participants; high-certainty evidence). When compared to TAU, we found that psychosocial treatments reduce the dropout rate (RR 0.79, 95% CI 0.65 to 0.97; 9 studies, 735 participants; high-certainty evidence) and may make little to no difference in point abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.67, 95% CI 0.64 to 4.31; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence). We are uncertain whether they make any difference in point abstinence at the longest follow-up (RR 1.31, 95% CI 0.86 to 1.99; 2 studies, 124 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Compared to TAU, psychosocial treatments may make little to no difference in continuous abstinence at the end of treatment (RR 1.18, 95% CI 0.92 to 1.53; 1 study, 128 participants; low-certainty evidence); probably make little to no difference in the frequency of drug intake at the end of treatment (SMD -1.17, 95% CI -2.81 to 0.47, 4 studies, 479 participants, moderate-certainty evidence); and may make little to no difference in the longest period of abstinence (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.54 to 0.21; 1 study, 110 participants; low-certainty evidence). None of the studies for this comparison assessed continuous abstinence at the longest follow-up. Only five studies reported harms related to psychosocial interventions; four of them stated that no adverse events occurred. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: This review's findings indicate that psychosocial treatments can help people with stimulant use disorder by reducing dropout rates. This conclusion is based on high-certainty evidence from comparisons of psychosocial interventions with both no treatment and TAU. This is an important finding because many people with stimulant use disorders leave treatment prematurely. Stimulant use disorders are chronic, lifelong, relapsing mental disorders, which require substantial therapeutic efforts to achieve abstinence. For those who are not yet able to achieve complete abstinence, retention in treatment may help to reduce the risks associated with stimulant use. In addition, psychosocial interventions reduce stimulant use compared to no treatment, but they may make little to no difference to stimulant use when compared to TAU. The most studied and promising psychosocial approach is contingency management. Relatively few studies explored the other approaches, so we cannot rule out the possibility that the results were imprecise due to small sample sizes.

Couples motivational interviewing with mobile breathalysers to reduce alcohol use in South Africa: a pilot randomised controlled trial of Masibambisane.

INTRODUCTION: Heavy alcohol use among people living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa can hinder the success of HIV treatment programmes, impacting progress towards United Nations Programme on HIV/AIDS goals. Primary partners can provide critical forms of social support to reduce heavy drinking and could be included in motivational interviewing (MI) interventions to address heavy drinking; however, few studies have evaluated MI interventions for couples living with HIV in sub-Saharan Africa. We aim to evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a couple-based MI intervention with mobile breathalyser technology to reduce heavy alcohol use and improve HIV treatment outcomes among HIV-affected couples in South Africa. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will employ a three-arm randomised controlled trial to assess the efficacy of couple-based MI (MI-only arm) and in conjunction with mobile breathalysers (MI-plus arm) to address alcohol use and HIV outcomes, as compared with enhanced usual care (control arm). We will enrol heterosexual couples aged 18-49 in a primary relationship for at least 6 months who have at least one partner reporting hazardous alcohol use and on antiretroviral therapy for 6 months. Participants in both MI arms will attend three manualised counselling sessions and those in the MI-plus arm will receive real-time feedback on blood alcohol concentration levels using a mobile breathalyser. Couples randomised in the control arm will receive enhanced usual care based on the South African ART Clinical Guidelines. Feasibility and acceptability indicators will be analysed descriptively, and exploratory hypotheses will be examined through regression models considering time points and treatment arms. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the University of California, San Francisco (HRPP; protocol number 21-35034) and Human Sciences Research Council Research Ethics Committee (REC: protocol number 1/27/20/21). We will disseminate the results at local community meetings, community-level health gatherings and conferences focused on HIV and alcohol use. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05756790.

Patient motivation and adherence in metacognitive therapy for major depressive disorder: an observational study.

The aim of this observational study was to examine the predictive and discriminant validity of patient motivation and adherence in metacognitive therapy (MCT) for depression. Motivational development for recovered- and non-recovered patients was also investigated. Motivation in sessions 1, 4, and 7 was measured using the Motivational Interviewing Skill Code 2.5 (MISC) in a 10-session trial of MCT for depression (N = 37). Adherence was assessed with the CBT compliance measure in session 7. The Beck Depression Inventory measured treatment outcome at 3-year follow-up. Recovered patients developed significantly more change talk and taking steps, and less sustain talk, as therapy progressed, compared to non-recovered patients. Evidence of the predictive validity of motivation in sessions 1 and 4 was limited. Higher sustain talk and taking steps in session 7 were significant predictors of more and less depressive symptoms, respectively. There was a moderate-strong correlation between motivation and adherence. The results confirm the predictive value of MISC in sessions 7 of MCT for depression, and establish differential motivational development between recovered and non-recovered patients. Subsequent research should clarify the discriminant validity and temporal relationships between motivation, adherence, and other clinical variables.

Creation and beta testing of a "choose your own adventure" digital simulation to reinforce motivational interviewing skills in genetic counseling.

Standardized patients and/or role-playing are commonly used for practicing genetic counseling (GC) skills. Use of digital simulation, incorporating gamification elements, would require fewer resources to sustain than standardized patients. This manuscript reports steps taken and the lessons learned from creating a digital "Choose your own adventure" simulation in which students select preferred dialog for a genetic counselor who is seeing an adult patient to discuss genetic testing for the known pathogenic variant that caused familial adenomatous polyposis (FAP) in their father. The case has three endings, one of which is attained by selecting options that are mostly consistent with motivational interviewing counseling techniques. We conducted a preliminary evaluation of our beta version among nine GC students and one educator using a survey to assess acceptability and appropriateness as well as to elicit open-ended feedback. All participants agreed or strongly agreed with statements indicating the case was acceptable, appropriate, and fun. Users particularly appreciated the immediate feedback given throughout the case simulation. Many users wanted more options to select from and listed various other recommendations, including several which would require substantial resources to implement.

Motivational interviewing for preventing oral morbidities in adults: Systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: This systematic review with meta-analysis was performed to assess whether motivational interviewing (MI) effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults. METHODS: Studies considered were randomized controlled trials, cluster-randomized controlled trials and community-based randomized trials assessing interventions based on MI or indicating that a counselling technique based on the principles developed by Miller and Rollnick was used. Controls were any type of oral health education or negative controls. Participants were 18-60 years old. The main outcome was any oral morbidity. From 602 studies identified in MEDLINE, Scopus, Web of Science and LILACS databases, seven studies were included in the synthesis. RESULTS: Studies included only evaluated periodontal outcomes, no studies were found for other oral morbidities. Patients' mean age was 43.7 years, and the follow-up time after MI or MI-based intervention varied between 1 month and 1 year. The total study population was 272 people with moderate-to-severe periodontitis; other groups analysed were pregnant women (n = 112) and patients with mental disorders and alcohol problems (n = 60). Meta-analysis for the plaque index (four studies, n = 267), bleeding on probing (two studies, n = 177) and gingival index (two studies, n = 166) were carried out. The summary effects for the random-effects model were estimated respectively as -3.59 percentage points (CI: [-11.44; 4.25] for plaque index, -6.41 percentage points (CI: [-12.18, -0.65]) for bleeding on probing and -0.70 (CI: [-1.87; 0.48]) for gingival index, marginally favouring the MI group. The reduced number of studies, the non-disclosure of some aspects of the data and the heterogeneity among them undermine the precision of the estimates. CONCLUSION: The current evidence available is limited to periodontal outcomes, and it is not possible to determine whether MI effectively prevents oral morbidities in adults.

Behavioural self-control training versus motivational enhancement therapy for individuals with alcohol use disorder with a goal of controlled drinking: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Controlled drinking (CD) is an attractive treatment goal for a large proportion of individuals with alcohol use disorder (AUD), but the availability of treatment methods supporting a goal of CD is scarce. We tested if behavioural self-control training (BSCT) was superior to motivational enhancement therapy (MET) for individuals with AUD with a treatment goal of CD. DESIGN: Randomized controlled two-group trial. Follow-ups were conducted at 12 and 26 weeks (primary end-point) after inclusion. SETTING: Three specialized dependency care clinics in Stockholm, Sweden. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred and fifty self-referred adults (52% men) fulfilling criteria of AUD (DSM-5) and a stated treatment goal of CD. INTERVENTION AND COMPARATOR: BSCT (n = 125), a five-session treatment based on cognitive behavioural therapy versus the active comparator, MET (n = 125), containing four sessions based on Motivational Interviewing. MEASUREMENTS: Primary outcome measure was mean weekly alcohol consumption at the 26-week follow-up, adjusted for baseline consumption. CONCLUSIONS: A randomized controlled trial found no evidence of a difference between behavioural self-control training and motivational enhancement therapy in reducing weekly alcohol consumption. Both groups substantially reduced consumption and behavioural self-control training was superior in reducing hazardous drinking.

Design of a Multicenter Randomized Controlled Trial comparing the effectiveness of shared decision making versus motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioral therapy for voluntary opioid tapering: The INSPIRE study protocol.

BACKGROUND: This paper describes the design and protocol of a pragmatic, randomized trial to evaluate the comparative effectiveness of shared decision making versus motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain for the voluntary tapering of opioid dose in adults with chronic noncancer pain. Integrated Services for Pain: Interventions to Reduce Pain Effectively (INSPIRE) is a multicenter, randomized trial conducted at three academic health centers in the southeastern United States. Participants are adults receiving long-term opioid therapy of at least 20 morphine milligram equivalents daily for chronic noncancer pain. METHODS: Participants were randomized to either the shared decision-making intervention or the motivational interviewing session and cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain intervention. All participants also received guideline-concordant care supporting opioid pharmacotherapy. The primary outcome was change from baseline in average daily prescribed opioid dose at 12 months, using prescribing data from electronic health records. Secondary outcomes were Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System Pain Interference and Physical Function at 12 months. CONCLUSION: This trial evaluates the comparative effectiveness of shared decision making versus motivational interviewing plus cognitive behavioral therapy for chronic pain for the voluntary tapering of opioid dose in adults with chronic noncancer pain. Results from this study can guide clinicians, researchers, and policymakers as they seek to reduce opioid prescribing and improve management of chronic pain. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03454555 (https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/record/NCT03454555). Participant enrollment began on June 26, 2019.

Application of motivational interviewing to group: Teaching advance care planning via group visits for clinical professionals.

OBJECTIVE: Advance Care Planning (ACP) via Group Visits (ACP-GV) is an innovative patient-centered intervention used in the United States Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) healthcare system. The goal of ACP-GV is to spread ACP to veterans and caregivers in medically underserved rural areas. Veterans, caregivers and those they trust participate in a group led by clinicians in Veterans Health Administration healthcare and/or community-based settings. To learn how to facilitate ACP-GV, clinicians attend ACP-GV training. The training teaches the ACP-GV group model and the theoretical components of Motivational Interviewing (MI) (Rollnick & Miller, 1995), which are used to empower participants to have conversations about their healthcare values and preferences. Therefore, the aim is to describe the specific MI techniques utilized by group facilitators in the innovative ACP-GV intervention. DISCUSSION: We provide exemplars for how group facilitators apply the MI techniques to the group discussion with participants. Lastly, we provide a scripted case example of a coded MI-concordant session of ACP-GV delivered with veterans in a healthcare setting that can be used in future training and education for clinicians interested in facilitating ACP using a group modality. CONCLUSION: MI is a key aspect of delivering ACP-GV, a high-quality, patient-centered intervention for veterans, caregivers and those they trust.

Embodied Conversational Agents Providing Motivational Interviewing to Improve Health-Related Behaviors: Scoping Review.

BACKGROUND: Embodied conversational agents (ECAs) are advanced human-like interfaces that engage users in natural face-to-face conversations and interactions. These traits position ECAs as innovative tools for delivering interventions for promoting health-related behavior adoption. This includes motivational interviewing (MI), a therapeutic approach that combines brief interventions with motivational techniques to encourage the adoption of healthier behaviors. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to identify the health issues addressed by ECAs delivering MI interventions, explore the key characteristics of these ECAs (eg, appearance, dialogue mechanism, emotional model), analyze the implementation of MI principles and techniques within ECAs, and examine the evaluation methods and primary outcomes of studies that use ECAs providing MI interventions. METHODS: We conducted a scoping review following the PRISMA-ScR (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews) methodology. Our systematic search covered the PubMed, Scopus, IEEE Xplore, ACM Digital, and PsycINFO databases for papers published between January 2008 and December 2022. We included papers describing ECAs developed for delivering MI interventions targeting health-related behaviors and excluded articles that did not describe ECAs with human appearances and without the necessary evaluation or MI explanation. In a multistage process, 3 independent reviewers performed screening and data extraction, and the collected data were synthesized using a narrative approach. RESULTS: The initial search identified 404 articles, of which 3.5% (n=14) were included in the review. ECAs primarily focused on reducing alcohol use (n=5, 36%), took on female representations (n=9, 64%), and gave limited consideration to user ethnicity (n=9, 64%). Most of them used rules-driven dialogue mechanisms (n=13, 93%), include emotional behavior to convey empathy (n=8, 57%) but without an automatic recognition of user emotions (n=12, 86%). Regarding MI implementation, of 14 studies, 3 (21%) covered all MI principles, 4 (29%) included all processes, and none covered all techniques. Most studies (8/14, 57%) conducted acceptability, usability, and user experience assessments, whereas a smaller proportion (4/14, 29%) used randomized controlled trials to evaluate behavior changes. Overall, the studies reported positive results regarding acceptability, usability, and user experience and showed promising outcomes in changes in attitudes, beliefs, motivation, and behavior. CONCLUSIONS: This study revealed significant advancements in the use of ECAs for delivering MI interventions aimed at promoting healthier behaviors over the past 15 years. However, this review emphasizes the need for a more in-depth exploration of ECA characteristics. In addition, there is a need for the enhanced integration of MI principles, processes, and techniques into ECAs. Although acceptability and usability have received considerable attention, there is a compelling argument for placing a stronger emphasis on assessing changes in attitudes, beliefs, motivation, and behavior. Consequently, inclusion of more randomized controlled trials is essential for comprehensive intervention evaluations.

Motivational interviewing for substance use reduction.

BACKGROUND: Substance use is a global issue, with around 30 to 35 million individuals estimated to have a substance-use disorder. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centred method that aims to strengthen a person's motivation and commitment to a specific goal by exploring their reasons for change and resolving ambivalence, in an atmosphere of acceptance and compassion. This review updates the 2011 version by Smedslund and colleagues. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for substance use on the extent of substance use, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. SEARCH METHODS: We searched 18 electronic databases, six websites, four mailing lists, and the reference lists of included studies and reviews. The last search dates were in February 2021 and November 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials with individuals using drugs, alcohol, or both. Interventions were MI or motivational enhancement therapy (MET), delivered individually and face to face. Eligible control interventions were no intervention, treatment as usual, assessment and feedback, or other active intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane, and assessed the certainty of evidence with GRADE. We conducted meta-analyses for the three outcomes (extent of substance use, readiness to change, retention in treatment) at four time points (post-intervention, short-, medium-, and long-term follow-up). MAIN RESULTS: We included 93 studies with 22,776 participants. MI was delivered in one to nine sessions. Session durations varied, from as little as 10 minutes to as long as 148 minutes per session, across included studies. Study settings included inpatient and outpatient clinics, universities, army recruitment centres, veterans' health centres, and prisons. We judged 69 studies to be at high risk of bias in at least one domain and 24 studies to be at low or unclear risk. Comparing MI to no intervention revealed a small to moderate effect of MI in substance use post-intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.48, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.89; I2 = 75%; 6 studies, 471 participants; low-certainty evidence). The effect was weaker at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.20, 95% CI 0.12 to 0.28; 19 studies, 3351 participants; very low-certainty evidence). This comparison revealed a difference in favour of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.05 to 0.20; 16 studies, 3137 participants; low-certainty evidence) and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.25; 9 studies, 1525 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.11 to 0.22; 5 studies, 1495 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Retention in treatment was slightly higher with MI (SMD 0.26, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.52; 2 studies, 427 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparing MI to treatment as usual revealed a very small negative effect in substance use post-intervention (SMD -0.14, 95% CI -0.27 to -0.02; 5 studies, 976 participants; very low-certainty evidence). There was no difference at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.17; 14 studies, 3066 participants), a very small benefit of MI at medium-term follow-up (SMD 0.12, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.22; 9 studies, 1624 participants), and no difference at long-term follow-up (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.17; 8 studies, 1449 participants), all with low-certainty evidence. There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.27 to 0.39; 2 studies, 150 participants) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.09, 95% CI -0.34 to 0.16; 5 studies, 1295 participants), both with very low-certainty evidence. Comparing MI to assessment and feedback revealed no difference in substance use at short-term follow-up (SMD 0.09, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.23; 7 studies, 854 participants; low-certainty evidence). A small benefit for MI was shown at medium-term (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.08 to 0.40; 6 studies, 688 participants) and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.24, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.41; 3 studies, 448 participants), both with moderate-certainty evidence. None of the studies in this comparison measured substance use at the post-intervention time point, readiness to change, and retention in treatment. Comparing MI to another active intervention revealed no difference in substance use at any follow-up time point, all with low-certainty evidence: post-intervention (SMD 0.07, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.29; 3 studies, 338 participants); short-term (SMD 0.05, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.13; 18 studies, 2795 participants); medium-term (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.01 to 0.17; 15 studies, 2352 participants); and long-term follow-up (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.07 to 0.13; 10 studies, 1908 participants). There was no difference in readiness to change (SMD 0.15, 95% CI -0.00 to 0.30; 5 studies, 988 participants; low-certainty evidence) and retention in treatment (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.14; 12 studies, 1945 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). We downgraded the certainty of evidence due to inconsistency, study limitations, publication bias, and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Motivational interviewing may reduce substance use compared with no intervention up to a short follow-up period. MI probably reduces substance use slightly compared with assessment and feedback over medium- and long-term periods. MI may make little to no difference to substance use compared to treatment as usual and another active intervention. It is unclear if MI has an effect on readiness to change and retention in treatment. The studies included in this review were heterogeneous in many respects, including the characteristics of participants, substance(s) used, and interventions. Given the widespread use of MI and the many studies examining MI, it is very important that counsellors adhere to and report quality conditions so that only studies in which the intervention implemented was actually MI are included in evidence syntheses and systematic reviews. Overall, we have moderate to no confidence in the evidence, which forces us to be careful about our conclusions. Consequently, future studies are likely to change the findings and conclusions of this review.

Effectiveness and feasibility of a motivational interviewing intake (MII) intervention for increasing client engagement in outpatient addiction treatment: an effectiveness-implementation hybrid design protocol.

BACKGROUND: Client discontinuation from outpatient addiction treatment programs is common, and the initial intake is the service delivery point with the highest attrition rate. Replacing the comprehensive intake assessment with a person-centered Motivational Interviewing (MI) intervention is a potential solution to address provider and client concerns about the disengaging, time-intensive nature of the typical initial intake. It remains unclear whether the use of an alternative to the standard intake at the initial visit can fit within typical organizational reporting requirements, whether it decreases attrition, and whether implementation of person-centered intake procedures within outpatient addiction treatment programs is feasible, acceptable, and can be sustained. PURPOSE: To describe the methods and design of an effectiveness-implementation hybrid type 1 trial of a Motivational Interviewing at Intake (MII) intervention using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). METHODS: The study will determine the effectiveness of two intake conditions: (1) standard comprehensive intake assessment (intake-as-usual [IAU]), and (2) MII consisting of a person-centered discussion between provider and client about the client's desire and intent to enter treatment. Although both interventions are focused on understanding client presenting complaints and needs for treatment, the delivery differs as the IAU uses a semi-structured assessment guide, while MII applies the theory of MI to have a conversation about treatment engagement. Adults seeking outpatient addiction treatment services will be randomly assigned to the MII condition (n = 75) or the IAU condition (n = 75). Primary outcomes will be client engagement (i.e., treatment entry, attendance, and completion) obtained from the electronic medical record. Secondary outcomes (client motivation and therapeutic alliance) will be putative mechanisms of client engagement assessed immediately before and after the intake. The trial also will explore determinants of effective, sustainable implementation using assessments of organizational readiness and capacity to change, as well as interviews on MII implementation feasibility. CONCLUSION: This trial of an MII intervention will investigate the feasibility of a motivational intervention as an initial contact with substance use treatment-seeking clients as well as indicators of intervention effectiveness within the systems where it is employed. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT05489068.

Brief Action Planning in Health and Health Care: A Scoping Review.

Achieving maximal health outcomes via health promotion and disease prevention requires the adoption of healthy behaviors. Brief action planning (BAP) is a method for patient self-management, health behavior change, and health coaching with potentially broad implications for and clinical applications in health and health care contexts. This scoping review presents 5 major findings about the literature on BAP: the principal geographic locations and the clinical contexts of its application, the types of research evaluations that it has undergone to date, the theoretic frameworks in which it is grounded, and the fidelity of its use in clinical practice.

Randomized phase III trial evaluating motivational interviewing and text interventions to optimize adherence to breast cancer endocrine therapy (Alliance A191901): the GETSET protocol.

BACKGROUND: Hormone receptor-positive (HR +) breast cancer is the most common type of breast cancer in the USA but has excellent long-term outcomes in recent decades, in part due to effective oral endocrine therapy (ET). ET medications are typically prescribed for 5 to 10 years, depending on the risk of recurrence, and must be taken daily. One limiting factor to ET efficacy is nonadherence, with high-risk groups for nonadherence including younger women and Black women. METHODS: The Alliance for Clinical Trials in Oncology (Alliance) trial A191901 is an ongoing, four-arm (text message reminder (TMR), motivational interviewing (MI), TMR plus MI, or enhanced usual care) randomized clinical trial that tests the efficacy and effect of two interventions (TMR and/or MI) on improved ET adherence, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), and resource use requirements among HR + breast cancer survivors. Participants are randomized in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to the four arms. With an assumed loss to follow-up of approximately 11%, we plan to recruit 1180 participants. Randomization is stratified based on age and race to ensure balance between the arms, and we oversample younger and Black women, with each group representing 30% of the study population. Participants randomized to an intervention will actively participate in the intervention for 9 months, and all participants will be followed for adherence data and PRO endpoints, through the use of the Pillsy cap medication event monitoring system and Alliance ePRO survey app (i.e., Patient Cloud). The primary analysis will compare Pillsy-measured ET adherence among study arms at 12 months. DISCUSSION: This multisite study will not only define strategies to improve adherence to breast cancer oral therapies, but it will also potentially support strategies in large cooperative research groups that can increase delivery and tolerability of ET, involve diverse patient populations in clinical research, and engage patients effectively in interventional studies, using remote and cost-effective delivery methods. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov NCT04379570 . Registered on 7 May 2020.

Health Topics Emerged From Brief Motivational Interviewing: A randomized clinical trial.

Purpose The goal of this study was to analyze transcription of audio recordings to determine health topics that emerged from brief-motivational interviewing (MI) compared to traditional oral hygiene instructions (OHI).Methods Fifty-eight periodontal maintenance patients were randomized to a brief-MI or traditional OHI group for a longitudinal 1-year clinical trial. Both groups received four patient education sessions per their assigned group. Audio recordings were transcribed and coded. The overarching themes and subthemes emerged were quantified and reported as the number of instances per participant. Global scores and behavioral counts were compared across baseline, 4, 8, and 12-month research visits using mixed-effect models.Results Of the six overarching themes, the brief-MI group evoked more topics toward total health. Oral home care behaviors (15 vs 10.2) and oral diseases/conditions (3.3 vs 1.9) were discussed more in the brief-MI group compared to the traditional OHI group. This positive outcome for the average number of times a health topic was discussed in the brief-MI group compared to the traditional OHI group continued for the remaining major themes: lifestyle behaviors (1.0 vs 0.4), nutrition (2.6 vs 0.8), emotional/mental health (1.8 vs 0.8) and general health (1.2 vs 0.4).Conclusion This study identified that brief-MI was a more successful communication approach to increase discussions of oral home care behaviors, oral diseases/conditions, lifestyle behaviors, nutrition, emotional/mental health and general health compared to traditional OHI in individuals with periodontitis.

Motivational interviewing in promoting oral health: A literature review.

Behavioral sciences are a group of disciplines that involve the study of human actions. Various behavioral models have been used in the past 50 years in behavior modification. One behavioral model currently being studied for its application in oral healthcare is motivational interviewing (MI). Motivational interviewing is a patient-centered psycho-behavioral method used in various fields of medicine and psychology to help patients change their health-affecting behaviors. Effective health promotion is important, since in developed countries, the majority of deaths and diseases are caused by chronic conditions. Controlling and treating chronic diseases require sustained commitment. This literature review aimed to describe the current methods of health promotion for oral health, based on various disease models, with a thorough discussion of the psycho-behavioral method known as MI, and its applications in dentistry and oral health. There is evidence that MI is applied in various health and dental areas, such as oral health promotion, early childhood caries (ECC), periodontal disease, smoking cessation, and improving the quality of life during and after cancer treatment. The clinical and research limitations of this method were also addressed. Comparing the general ideas and ethos of MI to the definition of health promotion by the World Health Organization (WHO), it can be stated that they represent a common approach to promoting health.

The effects of psychoeducation and motivational interviewing on treatment adherence and functionality in individuals with bipolar disorder.

BACKGROUND: Individuals diagnosed with bipolar disorder (BD) encounter difficulties in adherence to treatment and functionality. Although it is known that psychosocial interventions such as motivational interviewing (MI) and psychoeducation are important in regard to improving adherence to treatment and functionality, the content and nature of these interventions remain uncertain. OBJECTIVE: This study was conducted to determine the effects of psychoeducation and MI on treatment adherence and functionality in individuals diagnosed with BD. METHOD: In this study, a quasi-experimental pretest-posttest design with three groups was adopted. The study was completed with 119 participants in the MI (n = 32), psychoeducation (n = 31), and control (n = 56) groups. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant improvement in the psychoeducation and MI groups in terms of treatment adherence compared to the control group (F = 32.672, p = 0.001, Partial η2 = 0.364). Similarly, the psychoeducation and MI groups had significantly higher functionality levels compared to the control group, and significant differences were observed between the groups regarding the degree of improvement in functionality dimensions including the feeling of stigmatization (F = 8.433, p = 0.001, Partial η2 = 0.129) and participation in social activities (F = 7.038, p = 0.001, Partial η2 = 0.110). CONCLUSION: It can be stated that psychoeducation and MI have positive effects in terms of improvement in treatment adherence and functionality in individuals diagnosed with BD.