BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous research indicates that motivational interviewing (MI) skills decline over time among participants in training workshops when post-workshop feedback and coaching are not provided. This study explored moderators of skill retention among trainees learning MI mainly for substance use disorder treatment in real-world treatment settings, including workshop enhancements and type and dose of post-workshop feedback and coaching. METHODS: A meta-analysis of training studies was conducted with studies that reported MI skills using observational measures and that included trainees from real-world agency settings. Standardized change scores were calculated to indicate the magnitude of pre-post training change in MI skills; standardized change scores from post-training to 3 and 6+ months follow-up were calculated to indicate the sustainability of training gains over time. Effect sizes were aggregated using random effects models. RESULTS: Twenty-one papers that reported the effects of MI training on agency staff were included in this review. Across studies, training yielded gains in MI skills (d = 0.76). Studies that did not include feedback and/or coaching reported eroding skills over a 6-month follow-up (d = -0.30), whereas post-workshop feedback/coaching sustained skills (d = 0.03). Effects of post-workshop feedback/coaching were moderated by frequency, duration and length of training. Moreover, studies reporting low levels of attrition from training protocols showed small increases in skills over the 6-month follow-up period (d = 0.12), whereas studies with high attrition showed skill erosion (d = -0.29). CONCLUSIONS: On average, three to four feedback/coaching sessions over a 6-month period sustain skills among trainees for motivational interviewing, mainly for substance use disorder treatment. However, high rates of attrition from feedback/coaching contributes to post-workshop skill erosion.
BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Previous research indicates that motivational interviewing (MI) skills decline over time among participants in training workshops when post-workshop feedback and coaching are not provided. This study explored moderators of skill retention among trainees learning MI mainly for substance use disorder treatment in real-world treatment settings, including workshop enhancements and type and dose of post-workshop feedback and coaching. METHODS: A meta-analysis of training studies was conducted with studies that reported MI skills using observational measures and that included trainees from real-world agency settings. Standardized change scores were calculated to indicate the magnitude of pre-post training change in MI skills; standardized change scores from post-training to 3 and 6+ months follow-up were calculated to indicate the sustainability of training gains over time. Effect sizes were aggregated using random effects models. RESULTS: Twenty-one papers that reported the effects of MI training on agency staff were included in this review. Across studies, training yielded gains in MI skills (d = 0.76). Studies that did not include feedback and/or coaching reported eroding skills over a 6-month follow-up (d = -0.30), whereas post-workshop feedback/coaching sustained skills (d = 0.03). Effects of post-workshop feedback/coaching were moderated by frequency, duration and length of training. Moreover, studies reporting low levels of attrition from training protocols showed small increases in skills over the 6-month follow-up period (d = 0.12), whereas studies with high attrition showed skill erosion (d = -0.29). CONCLUSIONS: On average, three to four feedback/coaching sessions over a 6-month period sustain skills among trainees for motivational interviewing, mainly for substance use disorder treatment. However, high rates of attrition from feedback/coaching contributes to post-workshop skill erosion.
Authors: Anita Y Kinney; Rachel Howell; Rachel Ruckman; Jean A McDougall; Tawny W Boyce; Belinda Vicuña; Ji-Hyun Lee; Dolores D Guest; Randi Rycroft; Patricia A Valverde; Kristina M Gallegos; Angela Meisner; Charles L Wiggins; Antoinette Stroup; Lisa E Paddock; Scott T Walters Journal: Contemp Clin Trials Date: 2018-09-18 Impact factor: 2.226
Authors: Steve Martino; Paula Zimbrean; Ariadna Forray; Joy S Kaufman; Paul H Desan; Todd A Olmstead; Kathryn Gilstad-Hayden; Ralitza Gueorguieva; Kimberly A Yonkers Journal: J Gen Intern Med Date: 2019-08-29 Impact factor: 5.128
Authors: Michael B Madson; Margo C Villarosa-Hurlocker; Julie A Schumacher; Daniel C Williams; Jami M Gauthier Journal: Subst Abus Date: 2018-10-09 Impact factor: 3.716
Authors: Julie A Schumacher; Daniel C Williams; Randy S Burke; Amee J Epler; Patricia Simon; Scott F Coffey Journal: Train Educ Prof Psychol Date: 2018-04-30