Tse, N., Tse, S., & Wong, P. (2022). Collective motivational interviewing for individuals with drug use problems: A pre-post-follow-up, uncontrolled pilot study. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19, 16344. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph192316344
Impact Factor: 4.614 (2021)
Journal Rank: JCR - Q1: Public, Environmental & Occupational Health (SSCI)
CiteScore - Q1 (Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health)
Abstract
Collective motivational interviewing (CMI) is a novelty motivational approach which optimises the motivational interviewing (MI) for individuals from collectivistic cultures. While MI has been empirically tested as an effective intervention for addictive disorders and has had a positive effect on facilitating lifestyle changes, CMI has retained the potency of MI as an individualistic intervention, and it further invites the social network resources to strengthen the level of motivation and cultivate a joint change partnership. This pilot study was the first clinical study of CMI to work with individuals with drug use problems (IDUPs) by involving concerned significant others (CSOs) in the three-session intervention, and the fidelity control was assessed by the Collective Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity (CMITI) scale. This pre-post–follow-up and uncontrolled feasibility study was conducted between 2017 and 2019, with dyads of 20 IDUPs and their CSOs. The potential impacts of CMI were examined by measures at baseline, post-intervention, and 1-month and 3-month post-intervention. All clinical sessions were audio-recorded, and four cases were randomly selected for fidelity review by two trained coders. The normality of data at the baseline was checked by a Shapiro–Wilk test. Non-parametric Wilcoxon-signed-rank test and repeated-measures ANOVA were employed for quantitative analysis. The results showed that six IDUPs had reduced drug use, and ten maintained drug abstinence with the support of CSOs, whereas four IDUPs remained unchanged or increased drug use. Overall, at the 3-month follow-up, drug use was reduced (p > 0.05), social support was strengthened (p < 0.05), and the IDUPs’ motivation for change was enhanced (p < 0.05). However, the small sample sizes, non-random sampling, and lack of control group may limit the generalizability and confirmation of the outcomes and of the “real effects”. This finding of the study suggests that the CMI is a feasible and acceptable therapeutic tool to motivate IDUPs with the support of CSOs to achieve mutually agreed-upon goals. Further development and evaluation with robust methodology are warranted.
Nick’s ResearchGate (Free to download the article):
Tse, N., Tse, S., Wong, P., & Adams, P. (2022). Collective motivational interviewing for substance use problems: Concept and implications. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction, 1-18. https://doi.org/h5qc
Impact Factor: 11.555 (2021)
Substance Abuse SCIE (Q1)/SSCI (Q1); Psychiatry SSCI (Q1)/SCIE (Q1)
Top Journal in Addiction Science in the Year 2021
Abstract
Collective motivational interviewing (CMI) breaks new ground by extending the theory of motivational interviewing (MI) beyond the individual to include the social network. We explain the core concepts of the six-process model of CMI, which involves multiple parties in the motivational process in embodying a spirit of “neutrality”. The semi-structured manual-guided CMI was trialed in persons with substance use with the support of concerned significant others (CSOs), which demonstrated positive outcomes on motivation, social support, frequency of drug use, and adherence to long-term drug treatments. Our developed CMI approach makes a clear contribution to the theory of MI and can potentially benefit people with substance use problems with complex needs. Presently, we are refining CMI and have been applying this approach to additional clients and CSOs. We call for more studies to monitor its fidelity and wider application in populations of individuals affected by substance use disorders.
Nick’s ResearchGate (Free to download the article):
https://bit.ly/3IQVkq3
(Access to the article is provided by Springer Nature ResearchGate and Springer Nature have partnered to provide new ways of accessing research content.)
Li, L., Zhu, S., Tse, N., Tse, S., & Wong, P. (2016). Effectiveness of motivational interviewing to reduce illicit drug use in adolescents: a systematic review and meta‐analysis. Addiction, 111(5), 795-805. https://doi.org/10.1111/add.13285
Impact Factor: 5.789 (2016)
Substance Abuse SCIE (Q1)/SSCI (Q1); Psychiatry SSCI (Q1)/SCIE (Q1)
Top Journal in Addiction Science in the Year 2016
Abstract
Aims
Motivational interviewing (MI) is a commonly used intervention approach to promote reduction or cessation of substance abuse. Effects may be different for adolescents, so it is useful to assess the state of the evidence in this subpopulation. This paper aimed to assess evidence for MI effectiveness in adolescents.
Method
EBSCOhost, ProQuest and Digital Dissertation Consortium were searched using keywords. Ten randomized trials from the United Kingdom, United States and Taiwan, including 1466 participants, were identified and analysed using a random effects model. Primary outcome measures captured were: the extent of drug use, intention to use drugs and readiness to change. Each study received a high-quality score based on the Miller Quality Scoring Coding System. Moderator analyses were also conducted to examine the impacts of follow-up period, delivery setting and study design on the effectiveness of MI.
Results
No statistically significant effect of MI on was found change of drug use behaviours [d = 0.05, 95% confidence interval (CI) = −0.06, 0.17, P = 0.36]. A significant effect was found on attitude change (d = 0.44, 95% CI = 0.20, 0.67, P = 0.0002). The funnel plot was asymmetrical, suggesting publication bias favouring small studies with higher effect sizes.
Conclusion
Motivational interviewing has not been found thus far to reduce adolescent use of illicit drugs. It may influence intentions to change, but evidence of publication bias weakens confidence in this conclusion.