Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 Feb;100(2):190-198.
doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.08.027. Epub 2016 Aug 26.

Motivational interviewing to improve health screening uptake: A systematic review

Sarah J Miller  1 , Kelly Foran-Tuller  2 , Jessica Ledergerber  3 , Lina Jandorf  4
Affiliations

Motivational interviewing to improve health screening uptake: A systematic review

Sarah J Miller et al. Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Feb.

Abstract

Objective: Health screenings, physical tests that diagnose disease, are underutilized. Motivational interviewing (MI) may increase health screening rates. This paper systematically reviewed the published articles that examined the efficacy of MI for improving health screening uptake.

Methods: Articles published before April 28, 2015 were reviewed from PubMed, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Study methodology, participant demographics, outcomes and quality were extracted from each article.

Results: Of the 1573 abstracts, 13 met inclusion criteria. Of the 13 studies, 6 found MI more efficacious than a control, 2 found MI more efficacious than a weak control yet equivalent to an active control, and 3 found MI was not significantly better than a control. Two single arm studies reported improvements in health screening rates following an MI intervention.

Conclusions: MI shows promise for improving health screening uptake. However, given the mixed results, the variability amongst the studies and the limited number of randomized trials, it is difficult to discern the exact impact of MI on health screening uptake.

Practice implications: Future research is needed to better understand the impact of MI in this context. Such research would determine whether MI should be integrated into standard clinical practice for improving health screening uptake.

Keywords: Health screenings; Motivational interviewing; Prevention.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflicts of Interest

The authors do not have any conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
PRISMA Flow Diagram
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Steele CB, Rim SH, Joseph DA, King JB, Seeff LC National Center for Chronic Disease Prevention and Health Promotion, CDC. Colorectal cancer incidence and screening - United States, 2008 and 2010. MMWR Surveill. Summ. 2013;62(Suppl 3):53–60. - PubMed
    1. Blackwell D, Lucas J, Clarke T. Summary health statics for U.S. adults: National Health Interview Survey, 2012. 2014;10(260) - PubMed
    1. Center for Disease Control and Prevention. Cancer Screening - Unites States, 2010. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) 2012;61:41–45. - PubMed
    1. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational Interviewing: Helping People Change. New York: The Guilford Press; 2013.
    1. Murphy JG, Dennhardt AA, Skidmore JR, Martens MP, McDevitt-Murphy ME. Computerized versus motivational interviewing alcohol interventions: impact on discrepancy, motivation, and drinking. Psychol. Addict. Behav. 2010;24:628–639. - PMC - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms