A Randomized Trial of Methods to Help Clinicians Learn Motivational Interviewing.

TLDR

The trial evaluated methods for learning motivational interviewing among substance‑abuse clinicians. Licensed substance‑abuse professionals (140) were randomized to five training conditions—workshop alone, workshop plus feedback, workshop plus coaching, workshop plus feedback and coaching, or a waiting‑list control—and their practice was audio‑recorded and assessed at baseline, post‑training, and at 4, 8, and 12 months. Trained groups achieved greater proficiency gains than controls, with coaching and feedback further enhancing post‑training skill; the waiting‑list group showed modest improvement after delayed training, proficiency remained stable over 12 months, and clinicians’ self‑reported skillfulness did not correlate with observed proficiency.

Abstract

The Evaluating Methods for Motivational Enhancement Education trial evaluated methods for learning motivational interviewing (MI). Licensed substance abuse professionals (N = 140) were randomized to 5 training conditions: (a) clinical workshop only; (b) workshop plus practice feedback; (c) workshop plus individual coaching sessions; (d) workshop, feedback, and coaching; or (e) a waiting list control group of self-guided training. Audiotaped practice samples were analyzed at baseline, posttraining, and 4, 8, and 12 months later. Relative to controls, the 4 trained groups showed larger gains in proficiency. Coaching and/or feedback also increased posttraining proficiency. After delayed training, the waiting list group showed modest gains in proficiency. Posttraining proficiency was generally well maintained throughout follow-up. Clinician self-reports of MI skillfulness were unrelated to proficiency levels in observed practice.