Gobat Nina, Copeland Lauren, Cannings-John Rebecca, Robling Michael, Carpenter Judith, Cowley Laura, Williams Denitza, Sanders Julia, Paranjothy Shantini, Moyers Theresa
Research Fellow, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Research Associate, School of Medicine, Cardiff University, Cardiff, Wales, UK.
Eur J Pers Cent Healthc. 2018;6(1):37-49. doi: 10.5750/ejpch.v6i1.1389.
Motivational Interviewing (MI) is an individual-level approach to behaviour change that has been evaluated in over 600 randomised clinical trials across multiple settings. Increasingly, research efforts focus on how MI works and how it can best be integrated into public health and clinical programmes. As the application of MI expands, a key integration challenge involves specifying the focus of a conversation such that a practitioner might ignite and intensify a patient's internal motivation for change related to that focus. At present, this challenge is poorly conceptualised. We aimed to clarify the construct of "focusing" and to develop a practical tool that can be used to develop and assess practitioner competence.
First we reviewed validated MI measures to elucidate current conceptualisations of focusing. Second, we identified practitioner speech acts that led to topic transitions. We then drafted the first version of MIFI. A gold standard rater, together with one expert MI and 3 non-expert MI raters, each used MIFI to coded 20 audio recordings from a feasibility study of MI and breastfeeding maintenance (n=170 observations). Internal consistency and inter-rater reliability analyses were conducted.
Published MI measures include 'focusing' as a strategy to agree a target change or to hold attention on that change target. We observed practitioners create or shift focus using 4 skills: questions, listening statements, giving information or meta-statements. Moderate to strong correlations were demonstrated between 4 of 5 global measures on the MIFI. Reliability estimates were good to excellent overall (5 coder ICCs>0.65), fair to excellent for the non-expert coding group (ICCs>0.55) and for the best coding pair (MI expert and non-expert ICCs >0.52).
We offer conceptual clarity about focusing in MI and have developed a tool to train practitioners in "focusing" when integrating MI into healthcare and public health interventions.
理论依据、目的和目标:动机性访谈(MI)是一种针对行为改变的个体层面方法,已在600多项跨多种环境的随机临床试验中得到评估。越来越多的研究工作聚焦于MI的作用机制以及如何将其最佳地整合到公共卫生和临床项目中。随着MI应用范围的扩大,一个关键的整合挑战在于明确对话的重点,以便从业者能够激发并强化患者与该重点相关的内在改变动机。目前,这一挑战的概念尚不清晰。我们旨在阐明“聚焦”的概念,并开发一种实用工具,用于培养和评估从业者的能力。
首先,我们回顾了经过验证的MI测量方法,以阐明当前对聚焦的概念理解。其次,我们确定了导致话题转换的从业者言语行为。然后,我们起草了MIFI的第一版。一位黄金标准评分者,以及一位MI专家和三位非MI专家评分者,各自使用MIFI对MI与母乳喂养维持可行性研究中的20份录音进行编码(共170次观察)。进行了内部一致性和评分者间信度分析。
已发表的MI测量方法将“聚焦”作为一种达成目标改变或关注该改变目标的策略。我们观察到从业者使用四种技巧来创造或转移重点:提问、倾听陈述、提供信息或元陈述。MIFI上的五项总体测量指标中有四项之间呈现出中度到高度的相关性。总体信度估计良好到优秀(5位编码者的组内相关系数>0.65),非专家编码组的信度为一般到优秀(组内相关系数>0.55),最佳编码对(MI专家和非专家的组内相关系数>0.52)的信度也为一般到优秀。
我们对MI中的聚焦提供了清晰的概念阐释,并开发了一种工具,用于在将MI整合到医疗保健和公共卫生干预措施中时培训从业者进行“聚焦”。