Effect of Training on Primary Care Residents' Performance in Brief Alcohol Intervention: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Brief alcohol interventions (BAI) reduce alcohol use and related problems in primary care patients with hazardous drinking behavior. The effectiveness of teaching BAI on the performance of primary care residents has not been fully evaluated. Methods: A cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted with 26 primary care residents who were randomized to either an 8-hour, interactive BAI training workshop (intervention) or a lipid management workshop (control). During the 6-month period after training (i.e., from October 1, 2003 to March 30, 2004), 506 hazardous drinkers were identified in primary care, 260 of whom were included in the study. Patients were interviewed immediately and then 3months after meeting with each resident to evaluate their perceptions of the BAI experience and to document drinking patterns. Results: Patients reported that BAI trained residents: conducted more components of BAI than did controls (2.4 vs 1.5, p = .001); were more likely to explain safe drinking limits (27% vs 10%, p = .001) and provide feedback on patients' alcohol use (33% vs 21%, p = .03); and more often sought patient opinions on drinking limits (19% vs 6%, p = .02). No between-group differences were observed in patient drinking patterns or in use of 9 of the 12 BAI components. Conclusions: The BAI-trained residents did not put a majority of BAI components into practice, thus it is difficult to evaluate the influence of BAI on the reduction of alcohol use among hazardous drinker

A randomised controlled trial and cost-effectiveness evaluation of "booster" interventions to sustain increases in physical activity in middle-aged adults in deprived urban neighbourhoods

Background: Systematic reviews have identified a range of brief interventions which increase physical activity in previously sedentary people. There is an absence of evidence about whether follow up beyond three months can maintain long term physical activity. This study assesses whether it is worth providing motivational interviews, three months after giving initial advice, to those who have become more active. Methods/Design: Study candidates (n = 1500) will initially be given an interactive DVD and receive two telephone follow ups at monthly intervals checking on receipt and use of the DVD. Only those that have increased their physical activity after three months (n = 600) will be randomised into the study. These participants will receive either a "mini booster" (n = 200), "full booster" (n = 200) or no booster (n = 200). The "mini booster" consists of two telephone calls one month apart to discuss physical activity and maintenance strategies. The "full booster" consists of a face-to-face meeting with the facilitator at the same intervals. The purpose of these booster sessions is to help the individual maintain their increase in physical activity. Differences in physical activity, quality of life and costs associated with the booster interventions, will be measured three and nine months from randomisation. The research will be conducted in 20 of the most deprived neighbourhoods in Sheffield, which have large, ethnically diverse populations, high levels of economic deprivation, low levels of physical activity, poorer health and shorter life expectancy. Participants will be recruited through general practices and community groups, as well as by postal invitation, to ensure the participation of minority ethnic groups and those with lower levels of literacy. Sheffield City Council and Primary Care Trust fund a range of facilities and activities to promote physical activity and variations in access to these between neighbourhoods will make it possible to examine whether the effectiveness of the intervention is modified by access to community facilities. A one-year integrated feasibility study will confirm that recruitment targets are achievable based on a 10% sample.Discussion: The choice of study population, study interventions, brief intervention preceding the study, and outcome measure are discussed

Treating substance abuse in primary care: a demonstration project

Purpose: The purpose of this project was to implement the delivery of a full range of substance abuse services in a primary care setting. Implementation and logistical issues including confidentiality and communication are discussed. The delivery of services, types of patients, and contextual and policy factors that influenced project implementation are described. Context: Substance use disorders are associated with significant morbidity and mortality worldwide. Patients with alcohol/drug problems frequently present in primary care. Effective and brief treatments are available and recommended for primary care but infrequently implemented. Institutional and provider barriers to implementation have been identified. Data source: Project documentation, data from the patient tracking system, and clinical case notes were used for description and analyses. Conclusion: Addressing substance abuse problems in primary care is important. Behavioral health professionals with training in substance abuse can provide a range of services that are likely to enhance the quality and quantity of care available to patients. Although contextual factors needed to be addressed, integration of services was manageable and seemed acceptable to both providers and patients in this project

Effectiveness of a group diabetes education programme in underserved communities in South Africa: pragmatic cluster randomized control trial

BACKGROUND: Diabetes is an important contributor to the burden of disease in South Africa and prevalence rates as high as 33% have been recorded in Cape Town. Previous studies show that quality of care and health outcomes are poor. The development of an effective education programme should impact on self-care, lifestyle change and adherence to medication; and lead to better control of diabetes, fewer complications and better quality of life. METHODS: Trial design: Pragmatic cluster randomized controlled trialParticipants: Type 2 diabetic patients attending 45 public sector community health centres in Cape TownInterventions: The intervention group will receive 4 sessions of group diabetes education delivered by a health promotion officer in a guiding style. The control group will receive usual care which consists of ad hoc advice during consultations and occasional educational talks in the waiting room.Objective: To evaluate the effectiveness of the group diabetes education programmeOutcomes: Primary outcomes: diabetes self-care activities, 5% weight loss, 1% reduction in HbA1c. Secondary outcomes: self-efficacy, locus of control, mean blood pressure, mean weight loss, mean waist circumference, mean HbA1c, mean total cholesterol, quality of lifeRandomisation: Computer generated random numbersBlinding: Patients, health promoters and research assistants could not be blinded to the health centre's allocationNumbers randomized: Seventeen health centres (34 in total) will be randomly assigned to either control or intervention groups. A sample size of 1360 patients in 34 clusters of 40 patients will give a power of 80% to detect the primary outcomes with 5% precision. Altogether 720 patients were recruited in the intervention arm and 850 in the control arm giving a total of 1570.DISCUSSION:The study will inform policy makers and managers of the district health system, particularly in low to middle income countries, if this programme can be implemented more widely.TRIAL REGISTER:Pan African Clinical Trial Registry PACTR20120500038038

Ten things that motivational interviewing is not

Background: In the 26 years since it was first introduced in this journal, motivational interviewing (MI) has become confused with various other ideas and approaches, owing in part to its rapid international diffusion. Methods: Based on confusions that have arisen in publications and presentations regarding MI, the authors compiled a list of 10 concepts and procedures with which MI should not be addled. Results: This article discusses 10 things that MI is not: (1) the transtheoretical model of change; (2) a way of tricking people into doing what you want them to do; (3) a technique; (4) decisional balance; (5) assessment feedback; (6) cognitive-behavior therapy; (7) client-centered therapy; (8) easy to learn; (9) practice as usual; and (10) a panacea. Conclusion: Clarity about what does (and does not) constitute MI promotes quality assurance in scientific research, clinical practice, and training

Action reflections: a client-centered technique to bridge the WHY-HOW transition in motivational interviewing

Background: When using Motivational Interviewing (MI), once resistance or ambivalence are resolved and motivation is solidified, many practitioners struggle with how best to transition the discussion toward action planning, while still retaining the spirit and style of client centeredness, i.e., moving from the WHY phase to the HOW phase of counseling in a style that is MI-consistent. For many, there is a perception that the counseling style, skills, and strategies used to build motivation are distinct from those used in the action planning phase. The WHY to HOW transition does not, however, necessitate abandoning a client-centered style for a more overtly educational or directive style. Goal setting, action planning, provision of advice, and relapse prevention can be implemented from an autonomy supportive, MI consistent framework. Method: To this end, this article will present a new class of reflection, which we have termed “action reflections”, that can be used to help bridge the WHY-HOW gap. Action reflections (AR) allow the clinician to maintain a tone and orientation that are consistent with MI, i.e. autonomy support; guiding versus directing, during the action phase of counseling. They differ from reflecting change talk as they focus not on the WHY of change, but the HOW, WHEN, or WHERE. Action Reflections (ARs) also differ from the more common type of reflections such as those that focus on client feelings, rolling with resistance, or acknowledging ambivalence as ARs usually contain a potential concrete step that the client has directly or obliquely mentioned. Like any type of reflection, ARs represent the clinician's best guess for what the client has said or, more apropos here, where the conversation might be heading. Conclusion: This article describes the various types of ARs and provides examples of each to help clinicians incorporate them into their behavior change counseling

Electronic cigarette use was not associated with quitting of conventional cigarettes in youth smokers

postprin

Understanding the culture of prescribing: qualitative study of general practitioners' and patients' perceptions of antibiotics for sore throats

OBJECTIVES: To better understand reasons for antibiotics being prescribed for sore throats despite well known evidence that they are generally of little help. DESIGN: Qualitative study with semi-structured interviews. SETTING: General practices in South Wales. SUBJECTS: 21 general practitioners and 17 of their patients who had recently consulted for a sore throat or upper respiratory tract infection. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Subjects' experience of management of the illness, patients' expectations, beliefs about antibiotic treatment for sore throats, and ideas for reducing prescribing. RESULTS: Doctors knew of the evidence for marginal effectiveness yet often prescribed for good relationships with patients. Possible patient benefit outweighed theoretical community risk from resistant bacteria. Most doctors found prescribing "against the evidence" uncomfortable and realised this probably increased workload. Explanations of the distinction between virus and bacterium often led to perceived confusion. Clinicians were divided on the value of leaflets and national campaigns, but several favoured patient empowerment for self care by other members of the primary care team. Patient expectations were seldom made explicit, and many were not met. A third of patients had a clear expectation for antibiotics, and mothers were more likely to accept non-antibiotic treatment for their children than for themselves. Satisfaction was not necessarily related to receiving antibiotics, with many seeking reassurance, further information, and pain relief. CONCLUSIONS: This prescribing decision is greatly influenced by considerations of the doctor-patient relationship. Consulting strategies that make patient expectations explicit without damaging relationships might reduce unwanted antibiotics. Repeating evidence for lack of effectiveness is unlikely to change doctors' prescribing, but information about risk to individual patients might. Emphasising positive aspects of non-antibiotic treatment and lack of efficacy in general might be helpful