Skip to main content
Key Specialties
Cardiology Diabetology Endocrinology Gastroenterology Geriatrics and Gerontology Gynecology and Obstetrics Hematology Infectious Disease Internal Medicine Nephrology Neurology Oncology Pediatrics Respiratory Medicine Rheumatology Surgery
Congress Coverage
2024 ACC Congress 2023 ESMO Congress 2023 EASD Congress 2023 ERS Congress 2023 ESC Congress
Clinical Collections
Advances in Alzheimer’s

At a glance: The STEP trials

A round-up of the STEP phase 3 clinical trials evaluating semaglutide for weight loss in people with overweight or obesity.
ADVANCED SEARCH
Log in
Top
BMC Primary Care
Published in: BMC Primary Care 1/2012

Open Access 01-12-2012 | Study protocol

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

Authors: Luis Á Pérula, Manuel Campiñez, Josep M Bosch, Nieves Barragán Brun, Juan C Arboniés, Julia Bóveda Fontán, Remedios Martín Alvarez, Jose A Prados, Enrique Martín-Rioboó, Josep Massons, Margarita Criado, José Á Fernández, Juan M Parras, Roger Ruiz-Moral, Jesús Manuel Novo, Group Dislip-EM

Published in: BMC Primary Care | Issue 1/2012

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

Lifestyle is one of the main determinants of people’s health. It is essential to find the most effective prevention strategies to be used to encourage behavioral changes in their patients. Many theories are available that explain change or adherence to specific health behaviors in subjects. In this sense the named Motivational Interviewing has increasingly gained relevance. Few well-validated instruments are available for measuring doctors’ communication skills, and more specifically the Motivational Interviewing.

Methods/Design

The hypothesis of this study is that the Scale for Measuring Motivational Interviewing Skills (EVEM questionnaire) is a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the primary care professionals skills to get behavior change in patients. To test the hypothesis we have designed a prospective, observational, multi-center study to validate a measuring instrument. –Scope: Thirty-two primary care centers in Spain. -Sampling and Size: a) face and consensual validity: A group composed of 15 experts in Motivational Interviewing. b) Assessment of the psychometric properties of the scale; 50 physician- patient encounters will be videoed; a total of 162 interviews will be conducted with six standardized patients, and another 200 interviews will be conducted with 50 real patients (n=362). Four physicians will be specially trained to assess 30 interviews randomly selected to test the scale reproducibility. -Measurements for to test the hypothesis: a) Face validity: development of a draft questionnaire based on a theoretical model, by using Delphi-type methodology with experts. b) Scale psychometric properties: intraobservers will evaluate video recorded interviews: content-scalability validity (Exploratory Factor Analysis), internal consistency (Cronbach alpha), intra-/inter-observer reliability (Kappa index, intraclass correlation coefficient, Bland & Altman methodology), generalizability, construct validity and sensitivity to change (Pearson product–moment correlation coefficient).

Discussion

The verification of the hypothesis that EVEM is a valid and reliable tool for assessing motivational interviewing would be a major breakthrough in the current theoretical and practical knowledge, as it could be used to assess if the providers put into practice a patient centered communication style and can be used both for training or researching purposes.

Trials registration Dislip-EM study

NCT01282190 (ClinicalTrials.gov)
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
Burke BL: The efficacy of Motivational Interviewing and Its Adaptations: What We Know So Far. Motivational Interviewing: Preparing People for Change, Vol. 2. Edited by: Miller WR, Rollnick S. 2002, New York: Guilford, 217-250.
2.
Miller WR: Motivational interviewing with problem drinkers. Behav Psychother. 1983, 11: 147-172. 10.1017/S0141347300006583.CrossRef
3.
Rogers CR: A theory of therapy, personality, and interpersonal relationships as developed in the client-centered framework. Psychology: The Study of a Science. Edited by: Koch P. 1959, New York: McGraw-Hill, 184-256. 3
4.
Rollnick S, Miller WR, Butler CC: Motivational Interviewing: Principles and Evidence in Motivational Interviewing in Health Care: Helping Patients Change Behavior. 2008, New York: Gilford Press
5.
Rubak S, Sandbæk A, Lauritzen T, Christensen B: Motivational interviewing: a systematic review and metaanalysis. B J of Gen Prac. 2005, 55: 305-312.
6.
7.
Moyers TB, Martin T, Manuel JK, Hendrickson SM, Miller WR: Assessing competence in the use of motivational interviewing. J Subst Abuse Treat. 2005, 28: 119-126.CrossRef
8.
Lane C, Huws-Thomas M, Hood K, Rollnick S, Edwards K, Robling M: Measuring adaptations of motivational interviewing: the development and validation of the behavior change counseling index (BECCI). Patient Educ Couns. 2005, 56: 166-173. 10.1016/j.pec.2004.01.003.CrossRefPubMed
9.
Bennett GA, Roberts HA, Vaughan TE, Gibbins JA, Rouse L: Evaluating a method of assessing competente in Motivational Interviewing: a study using simulated patient in the United Kindom. Addict Behav. 2007, 32: 69-79. 10.1016/j.addbeh.2006.03.022.CrossRefPubMed
10.
11.
Seguí Díaz M, Linares Pou L, Blanco López W, Ramos Aleixades J, Torrent Quetglas M: Tiempos durante la visita médica en Atención primaria. Aten Primaria. 2004, 33: 496-502. 10.1157/13061607.CrossRefPubMed
12.
Ruiz R, Prados JA, Alba M, Bellón J, Pérula LA: Validez y fiabilidad de un instrumento para la valoración de la entrevista clínica en médicos residentes de medicina de familia: el cuestionario GATHA-RES. Aten Primaria. 2001, 27: 469-477.CrossRef
13.
Gavilán E, de Torres LA P, Ruiz Moral R: Valoración de la relación clínica centrada en el paciente: Análisis de las propiedades psicométricas de la Escala CICAA. Aten Primaria. 2010, 42: 162-168. 10.1016/j.aprim.2009.07.005.CrossRef
14.
Mead N, Bower P: Patient centredness: a conceptual framework and review of the empirical literature. Soc Sci Med. 2000, 51: 1087-1110. 10.1016/S0277-9536(00)00098-8.CrossRefPubMed
15.
Ruiz Moral R, Peralta Munguia L, de Torres LA P, Gavilán Moral E, Loayssa Lara JR: Participación del paciente en la toma de decisiones en atención primaria: una herramienta para su medición. Aten Primaria. 2010, 42: 257-263. 10.1016/j.aprim.2009.09.020.CrossRefPubMed
16.
Duffy FD, Gordon GH, Whelan G, Cole-Kelly K, Frankel R: Assessing competence in communication and interpersonal skills: the Kalamazoo II Report. Acad Med. 2004, 79: 495-507. 10.1097/00001888-200406000-00002.CrossRefPubMed
17.
Kraan HF, Crijnen AAM, Van der Vleuten CPM, Imbos T: Evaluation instruments for medical interviewing skills. The medical interview. Clinical care, education and research. Edited by: Lipkin M Jr, Putnam SP, Lazare A. 1995, New York: Springer
18.
Street LR: Methodological considerations when assessing communication skills. Medical Encounter. 1997, 13: 3-5.
19.
Perula LA, Bosch JM, Julia B, Manuel C, Nieves B, Arbonies JC, et al: Effectiveness of Motivational Interviewing in improving lipid level in patients with dyslipidemia assisted by general practitioners: Dislip-EM study protocol. BMC Fam Pract. 2011, 12: 125-10.1186/1471-2296-12-125. U (Published: 5 November 2011).CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
20.
Elford RW, et al: with the Canadian task Force on Preventive Health Care. Counseling for Risky Health Habits: A Conceptual Framework for Primary Care Practitioners. 2001, London, ON: Canadian Task Force, CTFPHC Technical Report # 01–7. November.,
21.
De Villiers MR, De Villiers PJT, Kent AP: The Delphi technique in health sciences education research. Med Teach. 2005, 27: 639-643. 10.1080/13611260500069947.CrossRefPubMed
22.
Streiner DL, Norman GR: Health Measurement Scales. A practical guide to their development and use. 2003, New York: Oxford University Press, 3º ed
23.
Fleiss JL, Levin B, Paik MC: Statistical methods for rates and proportions. 2003, New Jersey: John Wiley and Sons, 3CrossRef
24.
Bland J, Altman D: Statistical methods for assessing agreement betweeen two methods of clinical measurements. Lancet. 1986, 1: 307-310.CrossRefPubMed
25.
Landis JR, Koch GG: The measurement of observer agreement for categorical data. Biometrics. 1977, 33: 159-174. 10.2307/2529310.CrossRefPubMed
26.
Jiménez J: Comparación de métodos cuantitativos de medida. FMC. 1994, 1: 404-410.
27.
Carretero-Dios H, Pérez C: Standards for the development and review of instrumental studies. Int J Clin Health Psychol. 2005, 5: 521-551.
28.
Floyd FJW, Keith F: Factor analysis in the development and refinement of clinical assessment instruments. Psychol Assess. 1995, 7: 286-299.CrossRef
29.
Norman GR, Streiner DL: Biostatistics. The Bare essentials. Hamilton. 1998, Ontario, Canada: B. C. Decker Inc,
30.
Mercer SW, McConnachie A, Maxwell M, Heaney D, Watt GCM: Relevance and practical use of the Consultation and Relational Empathy (CARE) Measure in general practice. Fam Pract. 2005, 22: 328-334. 10.1093/fampra/cmh730.CrossRefPubMed
31.
Wass V, van der Vleuten C, Shatzer J, Jones R: Assessment of clinical competence. Lancet. 2001, 357: 945-949. 10.1016/S0140-6736(00)04221-5.CrossRefPubMed
32.
Nunnally J, Bernstein I: Teoría psicométrica. 1995, Madrid: McGraw-Hill
33.
Grau G: Metodología para la validación de cuestionarios. Medifam. 1995, 5: 351-359.
34.
Conroy R, Pyörälä K, Fitzgerald T, Sans S, Menotti A, De Backer G, et al: Estimation of ten-year risk of fatal CVD in Europe: the SCORE Project. Eur Heart J. 2003, 24: 987-1003. 10.1016/S0195-668X(03)00114-3.CrossRefPubMed
35.
Sans S, Fitzgerald AP, Royo D, Conroy R, Graham I: Calibración de la tabla SCORE de riesgo cardiovascular para España. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2007, 60: 476-485. 10.1016/S0300-8932(07)75064-9.CrossRefPubMed
36.
Marrugat J, Vila J, Baena-Díez JM, Grau M, Sala J, Ramos R, Subirana I, Fitó M, Elosua R: Relative validity of the 10-year cardiovascular risk estimate in a population cohort of the REGICOR study. Rev Esp Cardiol. 2011, 64: 385-394. 10.1016/j.recesp.2010.12.011.CrossRefPubMed
37.
Coleman T: Using video-recorded consultations for research in primary care: advantages and limitations. Fam Pract. 2000, 17: 422-427. 10.1093/fampra/17.5.422.CrossRefPubMed
Metadata
Title
Is the Scale for Measuring Motivational Interviewing Skills a valid and reliable instrument for measuring the primary care professionals motivational skills?: EVEM study protocol
Authors
Luis Á Pérula
Manuel Campiñez
Josep M Bosch
Nieves Barragán Brun
Juan C Arboniés
Julia Bóveda Fontán
Remedios Martín Alvarez
Jose A Prados
Enrique Martín-Rioboó
Josep Massons
Margarita Criado
José Á Fernández
Juan M Parras
Roger Ruiz-Moral
Jesús Manuel Novo
Group Dislip-EM
Publication date
01-12-2012
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Primary Care / Issue 1/2012
Electronic ISSN: 2731-4553
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/1471-2296-13-112

Other articles of this Issue 1/2012

BMC Primary Care 1/2012 Go to the issue

Study protocol

Opportunistic detection of atrial fibrillation in subjects aged 65 years or older in primare care: a randomised clinical trial of efficacy. DOFA-AP study protocol

Research article

The UPBEAT depression and coronary heart disease programme: using the UK medical research council framework to design a nurse-led complex intervention for use in primary care

Research article

Randomized controlled trial on cardiovascular risk management by practice nurses supported by self-monitoring in primary care

Research article

Tracking family medicine graduates. Where do they go, what services do they provide and whom do they see?

Research article

Implementation of a lifestyle intervention for type 2 diabetes prevention in Dutch primary care: opportunities for intervention delivery

Research article

Qualitative evaluation of a local coronary heart disease treatment pathway: practical implications and theoretical framework