» Articles » PMID: 33793282

Differential Mechanisms of Change in Motivational Interviewing Versus Health Education for Smoking Cessation Induction

Overview
Specialties Psychiatry
Psychology
Date 2021 Apr 1
PMID 33793282
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

To determine if Motivational Interviewing (MI) versus health education (HE) elicited different types of client language and whether these differences were associated with outcomes in a randomized clinical trial (RCT) for cessation induction among people who smoke with low motivation to quit. A secondary data analysis was conducted using data from the MI and HE arms of a trial in which people who smoke ( = 202) with low desire to quit were randomly assigned to four sessions of MI, HE or brief advice. Mediation analyses examined two types of client language: change talk (CT) and a novel form of client speech called "learning talk" (LT). Outcomes were assessed at baseline, 3 and 6 months. With HE as the reference group, MI resulted in greater CT ( = 3.0, 95% CI: 1.7-5.5) which was associated with better outcomes (average = .34, = .13) and HE resulted in greater LT ( = .05, 95% CI: .02-.10) which was also associated with better outcomes (average = .42, = .08). Indirect parallel mediation effects on quit attempts were significant for both MI-CT ( = 1.4, 95% CI: 1.1-1.7) and HE-LT ( = .4, 95% CI: .2-.7). MI and HE were both efficacious via different pathways to change, confirming the utility of MI in this RCT as well as highlighting the potential of HE based on the "5R's" for smoking cessation. These findings emphasize the value of exploring theorized mechanisms of action of interventions evaluated in RCTs. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2021 APA, all rights reserved).

Citing Articles

Learning & motivational talk in smoking cessation interventions: An examination of session language in two randomized trials.

Borsari B, Herbst E, Ladd B, Delacruz J, Mastroleo N, Smith A Patient Educ Couns. 2024; 130:108421.

PMID: 39298832 PMC: 11611622. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2024.108421.


An approach to persons who are not willing to engage in behavioural change.

Omole O, Pretorius D, Von Pressentin K S Afr Fam Pract (2004). 2024; 66(1):e1-e5.

PMID: 39221727 PMC: 11369572. DOI: 10.4102/safp.v66i1.5874.

References
1.
Miller W, Yahne C, Moyers T, Martinez J, Pirritano M . A randomized trial of methods to help clinicians learn motivational interviewing. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004; 72(6):1050-62. DOI: 10.1037/0022-006X.72.6.1050. View

2.
Feingold A, MacKinnon D, Capaldi D . Mediation analysis with binary outcomes: Direct and indirect effects of pro-alcohol influences on alcohol use disorders. Addict Behav. 2019; 94:26-35. PMC: 6544488. DOI: 10.1016/j.addbeh.2018.12.018. View

3.
Imai K, Keele L, Tingley D . A general approach to causal mediation analysis. Psychol Methods. 2010; 15(4):309-34. DOI: 10.1037/a0020761. View

4.
Catley D, Goggin K, Harris K, Richter K, Williams K, Patten C . A Randomized Trial of Motivational Interviewing: Cessation Induction Among Smokers With Low Desire to Quit. Am J Prev Med. 2015; 50(5):573-583. PMC: 4841713. DOI: 10.1016/j.amepre.2015.10.013. View

5.
Orford J . Asking the right questions in the right way: the need for a shift in research on psychological treatments for addiction. Addiction. 2008; 103(6):875-85. DOI: 10.1111/j.1360-0443.2007.02092.x. View