Is the Scale for Measuring Motivational Interviewing Skills a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the primary care professionals motivational skills?: EVEM study protocol

Pérula, Luis A; Campiñez, Manuel; Bosch, J.M.; Brun, Nieves Barragán; Arboniés, Juan C; Fontán, Julia Bóveda; Álvarez, Remedios Martín; Prados, Jose A; Martín-Rioboó, Enrique; Massons, Josep Maria Doménech i; Criado, Margarita; Fernández, José Antonio de Paz; Parras, Juan M; Moral, Roger Ruiz; Novo, Jesús Manuel

doi:10.1186/1471-2296-13-112

Cited by 10 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 26 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Interpretivism, focused on understanding the meaning of the research topic from the perspective of the participants, was the overarching epistemology given in most of the 19 articles that described some methodological principle in relation to Delphi. Reference was simply made to a qualitative research approach in six of the studies (Chan, Wey, & Chang, 2014 ; Daim, Laakso, Rubin, & Linturi, 2012 ; McNichols, 2010 ; Pérula et al, 2012 ; Santos & Gomes, 2010 ; Traynor, Boyle, & Janke, 2013 ; Van Kemenade, Hardjono, & De Vries, 2011 ), which is generally consistent with interpretivist epistemology and constructivist ontology (Andrews, Sullivan, & Minichello, 2004 ). A qualitative approach to achieve quasi-objective quantitative estimates was discussed in four studies (Brody, Byham-Gray, Touger-Decker, Passannante, & Maillet, 2012 ; López-Sánchez & Pulido-Fernández, 2014 ; Palo & Tähtinen, 2011 ; Tang & Wu, 2010 ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a useful methodological framework for the Delphi technique

Guzys

Dickson‐Swift

Kenny

et al. 2015

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this article we aim to demonstrate how Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics may provide a sound methodological framework for researchers using the Delphi Technique (Delphi) in studies exploring health and well-being. Reporting of the use of Delphi in health and well-being research is increasing, but less attention has been given to covering its methodological underpinnings. In Delphi, a structured anonymous conversation between participants is facilitated, via an iterative survey process. Participants are specifically selected for their knowledge and experience with the topic of interest. The purpose of structuring conversation in this manner is to cultivate collective opinion and highlight areas of disagreement, using a process that minimizes the influence of group dynamics. The underlying premise is that the opinion of a collective is more useful than that of an individual. In designing our study into health literacy, Delphi aligned well with our research focus and would enable us to capture collective views. However, we were interested in the methodology that would inform our study. As researchers, we believe that methodology provides the framework and principles for a study and is integral to research integrity. In assessing the suitability of Delphi for our research purpose, we found little information about underpinning methodology. The absence of a universally recognized or consistent methodology associated with Delphi was highlighted through a scoping review we undertook to assist us in our methodological thinking. This led us to consider alternative methodologies, which might be congruent with the key principles of Delphi. We identified Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a methodology that could provide a supportive framework and principles. We suggest that this methodology may be useful in health and well-being studies utilizing the Delphi method.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a useful methodological framework for the Delphi technique

Guzys

Dickson‐Swift

Kenny

et al. 2015

International Journal of Qualitative Studies on Health and Well

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Internal validity was achieved by implementing comprehensive control measures during the study, from the selection of the study design (randomization in groups), to the use of an educational program for physicians based on the eight MI skills. In addition, we assessed participants' adherence to the intervention protocol and verified its reliability; implementation differences between the two arms of the study were assessed using a measure tool previously validated (EVEM) [ 18 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As a quality control measure and to assess physicians' adherence to the protocol, we recorded four real interviews between each participating physician and one of the patients recruited. All video recordings were scored using a Motivational Interviewing Assessment Scale (EVEM) [ 18 ]. Our research group previously demonstrated EVEM's reliability in assessing psychometric properties (intraclass correlation coefficient: >0.96; Cronbach's alpha: >0.95); as well as its validity and sensitivity to change.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Effectiveness of motivational interviewing in patients with dyslipidemia: a randomized cluster trial

et al. 2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

BackgroundIt is known that making people change their habits is challenging. It is crucial to identify the most effective approach that general practitioners (GPs) should use to help their patients change unhealthy habits. The objective this study was to assess the efficacy of a multifactorial intervention based on Motivational Interviewing performed by general practitioners to enhance lipid levels in patients with dyslipidemia, as compared to standard care.MethodsA multicenter, controlled, randomized, cluster, two-parallel arm trial with a 12-month follow-up conducted in 25 community health centers of the Spanish. 38 GPs and 227 primary care patients with uncontrolled dyslipidemia were included in the trial. GPs performed an intervention based either on Motivational Interviewing (MI) or standard practice. Lipid levels were measured, and the control degree was analyzed based on the criteria of clinical guidelines.Results107 were assigned to the Experimental Group (EG) and 120 to the Control Group (CG). An overall improvement was achieved in total cholesterol levels (Mean Difference –MD- = −19.60; 95 % CI: −15.33 at −23.87 mg/dl; p < 0.001), LDL-cholesterol levels (MD = −13.78; 95 % CI: −9.77 at −17.79 mg/dl; p < 0.001) and triglycerides (MD = −19.14; CI 95 %: −11.29 at −26.99 mg/dl; p < 0.001). No differences were found between the two groups. However, when we assessed the degree of lipid control by combining cholesterol <200 mg/dl and LDL-cholesterol < 130 mg/dl parameters, it was observed that a higher percentage of patients achieved target figures in the EG versus CG (13.1 % vs. 5.0 %; adjusted OR = 5.77, 95 % CI: 1.67-19.91).ConclusionA Motivational Interviewing-based approach conducted by Primary Care physicians aimed at patients with dyslipidemia, achieved a significant reduction in all lipid parameters, cardiovascular risk, weight reduction and the adherence to the Mediterranean diet, similar to that obtained with the usual intervention and superior in the proportion of patients achieving combined lipid control goals and the level of physical exercise.Trial registrationthe trial is registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT01282190; January 21, 2011).Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12875-015-0370-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

show abstract

“…[4] We have detailed in Box 1, the processes and measurements that were tested with each version of the scale. Differences in sample sizes between the original protocol and the validation process were due to feasibility criteria and losses in the development of the Dislip-EM study.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In Spain, where the development of the Measuring Motivational Interviewing Skills Scale (MIAS in English; 'Escala para la Valoraci on de la Entrevista Motivacional', EVEM scale, in Spanish) was completed, [4] practitioners are not usually able to spend more than 10 min in consultations with their patients. [5] The MITI advises 20-min samples of encounters when using scale per the author's methodology.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring the quality of motivational interviewing in primary health care encounters: The development and validation of the motivational interviewing assessment scale (MIAS)

Navarro

Torres

Fontcuberta

et al. 2016

European Journal of General Practice

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

(2016) Measuring the quality of motivational interviewing in primary health care encounters: The development and validation of the motivational interviewing assessment scale (MIAS), European Journal of General Practice, 22:3, 182-188, DOI: 10.1080/13814788.2016 To link to this article: https://doi.org/10. 1080/13814788.2016.1177508 Published online: 07 Jun 2016.Submit your article to this journal The motivational interviewing assessment scale is a valid tool to assess motivational interviewing skills in physicians.It has been tested in a wide variety of clinical situations in primary healthcare settings and can also be used as a tool for evaluation of training. ABSTRACTBackground: Motivational interviewing (MI) is a collaborative, goal-oriented method to help patients change behaviour. Tools that are often used to measure MI are the motivational interviewing skills code' (MISC), the 'motivational interviewing treatment integrity' (MITI) and the 'behaviour change counselling index' (BECCI). The first two instruments have not been designed to be used in primary healthcare (PHC) settings. The BECCI actually is time-consuming. The motivational interviewing assessment scale (MIAS, 'EVEM' in Spanish) was developed to measure MI in PHC encounters as an alternative to the previous instruments. Objectives: To validate MIAS as an instrument to assess the quality of MI in PHC settings. Methods: (a) Development: Sixteen experts in MI participated in the design, face and consensus validity, using a Delphi-type methodology. (b) Validation: Setting: 27 PHC centres located in Spain. Subjects: four experts in MI tested its psychometric properties with 332 video recordings coming from the Dislip-EM study (consultations provided by 37 practitioners). Measurements: dimensionality, internal consistency, reliability (intra-class correlation coefficient-ICC), sensitivity to change and convergent validity with the BECCI scale.Results: A 14-item scale was obtained after the validation process. Factor analysis: two factors explained 76.6% of the total variance. Internal consistency, a ¼ 0.99. Reliability: intra-rater ICC ¼ 0.96; inter-rater ICC ¼ 0.97. Sensitivity to change: means before and after training were 23.63 versus 38.57 (P < 0.001). Spearman's coefficient between the MIAS and the BECCI scale was 0.98 (P < 0.001). Conclusion:The MIAS is a consistent and reliable instrument to assess the use of MI in PHC settings.

show abstract

Is the Scale for Measuring Motivational Interviewing Skills a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the primary care professionals motivational skills?: EVEM study protocol

Cited by 10 publications

References 26 publications

Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a useful methodological framework for the Delphi technique

Gadamerian philosophical hermeneutics as a useful methodological framework for the Delphi technique

Effectiveness of motivational interviewing in patients with dyslipidemia: a randomized cluster trial

Measuring the quality of motivational interviewing in primary health care encounters: The development and validation of the motivational interviewing assessment scale (MIAS)

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About