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
. 2020 Dec:82:101909.
doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2020.101909. Epub 2020 Sep 6.

Motivational interviewing quality assurance: A systematic review of assessment tools across research contexts

Affiliations

Motivational interviewing quality assurance: A systematic review of assessment tools across research contexts

Margo C Hurlocker et al. Clin Psychol Rev. 2020 Dec.

Abstract

The need for sustained skill development and quality assurance when executing behavioral interventions is best demonstrated in the empirical evolution of Motivational Interviewing (MI). As a brief behavioral intervention that identifies the therapeutic process as an active treatment ingredient, it is critical for researchers, trainers, and administrators to use psychometrically sound and theoretically congruent tools to evaluate provider skills and fidelity when executing MI. Yet, no prior work has evaluated the breadth of MI tools employed across research contexts. Therefore, this review identified MI fidelity and skill development tools across measurement, training and efficacy/effectiveness studies and evaluated their psychometric strength and fit with current MI theory. We identified 199 empirical studies that employed an MI fidelity/skill tool and we found 21 tools with varying degrees of empirical support and theoretical congruence. Specifically, we identified five observer-, two trainee- and one client-rated tool with strong empirical support, and nine observer- and two client-rated tools with preliminary empirical support. We detailed the empirical strength, including the extent to which tools were linked to trainee/client outcomes across research contexts and offer recommendations on which MI tools to use in training, efficacy, and effectiveness trials.

Keywords: Fidelity; Motivational interviewing; Provider skills; Research contexts.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Conflict of Interest: All authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1.
Figure 1.. PRISMA diagram of article identification and inclusion procedure
Note. K/k = number of studies.

References

    1. Atkins DC, Steyvers M, Imel ZE, & Smyth P (2014). Scaling up the evaluation of psychotherapy: Evaluating motivational interviewing fidelity via statistical text classification. Implementation Science, 9, 49–60. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Baer JS, Carpenter KM, Beadnell B, Stoner SA, Ingalsbe MH, Hartzler B, Rosengren DB, & Drager Z (2012). Computer assessment of simulated patient interviews (CASPI): Psychometric properties of a web-based system for the assessment of motivational interviewing skills. Journal of Studies on Alcohol and Drugs, 75(1), 154–164. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barwick MA, Bennett LM, Johnson SN, McGowan J, & Moore JE (2012). Training health and mental health professionals in motivational interviewing: A systematic review. Children and Youth Services Review, 34, 1786–1795. doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2012.05.012 - DOI
    1. Brueck RK, Frick K, Loessl B, Kriston L, Schondelmaier S, Go C, …, Berner M (2009). Psychometric properties of the German version of the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity Code. Journal of Substance Abuse Treatment, 36, 44–48. - PubMed
    1. Burke BL, Arkowitz H, & Menchola M (2003). The efficacy of motivational interviewing: A meta-analysis of controlled clinical trials. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 77(5), 843–861. - PubMed

Publication types