Implementation of motivational interviewing in the general practice setting: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: General Practitioners (GPs) and Practice Nurses (PNs) collaboratively play an important role in preventing and monitoring chronic diseases. They are trained in Motivational Interviewing (MI), which is a communication style to intrinsically motivate patients to a healthier lifestyle. However, being trained in MI skills does not necessarily mean that it is implemented in daily practice so patients actually benefit. The aim of this study is to identify factors that facilitate or impede the implementation of MI in General Practice. METHODS: A total of 152 participants (93 GP-trainees and 59 PN-trainees) who were trained in MI completed a questionnaire regarding the implementation of MI. Semi-structured interviews (N = 17) were conducted with GPs and PNs (ranging from almost graduated to highly experienced) who were selected through the process of maximum variation sampling. The interview guide was based on the five-stage implementation model of Grol and Wensing. RESULTS: Thirteen factors that influence the implementation of MI in General Practice were identified. They can be allocated to three categories: (1) setting factors such as time, (2) GP/PN factors such as self-efficacy, and (3) patient factors such as cultural background. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, GPs and PNs considered MI to be useful and part of their professional responsibility. Most difficulties become apparent in stage 4 (change: applying MI skills in practice) and 5 (consolidation: integrating MI into daily routine and embedment in organisation) of Grol and Wensing's model. Therefore, it is important that training does not only focus on MI skills. It is essential to pay explicit attention to the factors that impact implementation, as well as the appropriate tools to tackle the barriers. These insights can help trainers to effectively support GPs and PNs to apply and maintain their MI skills in daily practice.

Assessment of motivational interviewing with the VASE-(Mental) Healthcare: Mixed-methods study to examine feasibility and validity in the general practice setting.

OBJECTIVE: The VASE-(M)HC is an instrument to evaluate Motivational Interviewing (MI) skills. We adjusted the previous version for use in the broader (mental) healthcare context, incorporated new MI insights, expanded the scoring system and created a parallel version. Feasibility and validity evidence in the general practice setting was explored. METHODS: The teaching staff of the GP specialty-training, GP-, and PN-trainees (N = 156) completed the VASE-(M)HC. In this mixed-methods study, we examined psychometric characteristics, compared parallel versions, and interviewed assessors. RESULTS: Our adjustments enable assessment of a wider range of MI skills, and allow differentiation of basic and advanced skills. Inter-rater reliability was excellent and internal consistency of the total scale was good for both versions. The parallel versions are comparable in terms of difficulty. CONCLUSION: The VASE-(M)HC is improved by our revisions and adds multiple advantages to the domain of available MI assessment tools. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Due to the adjustments, the instrument can be used in the GP setting (instead of sole focus on substance abuse). The parallel version is useful for research (pretest/posttest) and selective assessment (retake of a test). It is promising to further explore its applicability in the broader (mental) healthcare context and as training material.

Assessment of motivational interviewing: Psychometric characteristics of the MITS 2.1 in general practice.

OBJECTIVE: Motivational Interviewing (MI) is increasingly used in healthcare. The Motivational Interviewing Target Scheme 2.1 (MITS) can be used to assess MI in short consultations. This quantitative validation study is a sequel to a qualitative study, which showed that the MITS is suitable for low-stakes assessment. We collected validity evidence to determine whether its suitability for high-stakes assessment in the GP-setting. METHODS: Consultations of GPs and GP-trainees were assessed using the MITS. The internal structure was studied using generalizability theory; intra class correlation (ICC), convergent and divergent validity was determined. RESULTS: Two coders and seven consultations were found to be necessary for high stakes assessment. We found higher ICCs as coders were more experienced. Convergent validity was found; results for divergent validity were mixed. CONCLUSION: The MITS is a suitable instrument for high-stakes MI assessments in GP-setting. The number of consultations and coders that are needed for assessment are comparable to other instruments for assessing communication skills. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: The MITS can be used to assess conversations for their MI consistency in GP-setting where most consultations are relatively short and are only partially dedicated to behaviour change. As the MITS assesses complex communication skills, experienced coders are needed.

Assessment of motivational interviewing: a qualitative study of response process validity, content validity and feasibility of the motivational interviewing target scheme (MITS) in general practice.

BACKGROUND: The Motivational Interviewing target Scheme (MITS) is an instrument to assess competency in Motivational Interviewing (MI) and can be used to assess MI in long and brief consultations. In this qualitative study we examined two sources of the Unified Model of Validity, the current standard of assessment validation, in the context of General Practice. We collected evidence concerning response process validity and content validity of the MITS in general practice. Furthermore, we investigated its feasibility. METHODS: Assessing consultations of General Practitioners and GP-trainees (GPs), the assessors systematically noted down their considerations concerning the scoring process and the content of the MITS in a semi-structured questionnaire. Sampling of the GPs was based on maximum variation and data saturation was used as a stopping criterion. An inductive approach was used to analyse the data. In response to scoring problems the score options were adjusted and all consultations were assessed using the original and the adjusted score options. RESULTS: Twenty seven assessments were needed to reach data saturation. In most consultations, the health behaviour was not the reason for encounter but was discussed on top of discussing physical problems. The topic that was most discussed in the consultations was smoking cigarettes. The adjusted score options increased the response process validity; they were more in agreement with theoretical constructs and the observed quality of MI in the consultations. Concerning content validity, we found that the MITS represents the broad spectrum and the current understanding of MI. Furthermore, the MITS proved to be feasible to assess MI in brief consultations in general practice. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the collected evidence the MITS seems a promising instrument to measure MI interviewing in brief consultations. The evidence gathered in this study lays the foundation for research into other aspects of validation.