Evaluation of therapist and client language in Motivational Interviewing (MI) sessions: A secondary analysis of data from the Southern Methodist Alcohol Research Trial (SMART) study

In the United States, “binge” drinking among college students is an emerging public health concern due to the significant physical and psychological effects on young adults. The focus is on identifying interventions that can help decrease high-risk drinking behavior among this group of drinkers. One such intervention is Motivational interviewing (MI), a client-centered therapy that aims at resolving client ambivalence by developing discrepancy and engaging the client in change talk. Of late, there is a growing interest in determining the active ingredients that influence the alliance between the therapist and the client. This study is a secondary analysis of the data obtained from the Southern Methodist Alcohol Research Trial (SMART) project, a dismantling trial of MI and feedback among heavy drinking college students. The present project examines the relationship between therapist and client language in MI sessions on a sample of “binge” drinking college students. Of the 126 SMART tapes, 30 tapes (‘MI with feedback’ group = 15, ‘MI only’ group = 15) were randomly selected for this study. MISC 2.1, a mutually exclusive and exhaustive coding system, was used to code the audio/videotaped MI sessions. Therapist and client language were analyzed for communication characteristics. Overall, therapists adopted a MI consistent style and clients were found to engage in change talk. Counselor acceptance, empathy, spirit, and complex reflections were all significantly related to client change talk (p-values ranged from 0.001 to 0.047). Additionally, therapist ‘advice without permission’ and MI Inconsistent therapist behaviors were strongly correlated with client sustain talk (p-values ranged from 0.006 to 0.048). Simple linear regression models showed a significant correlation between MI consistent (MICO) therapist language (independent variable) and change talk (dependent variable) and MI inconsistent (MIIN) therapist language (independent variable) and sustain talk (dependent variable). The study has several limitations such as small sample size, self-selection bias, poor inter-rater reliability for the global scales and the lack of a temporal measure of therapist and client language. Future studies might consider a larger sample size to obtain more statistical power. In addition the correlation between therapist language, client language and drinking outcome needs to be explored.^

Knowledge and Expectations of Support People in Prenatal Genetic Counseling Sessions

Prenatal genetic counseling patients have the ability to choose from a myriad of screening and diagnostic testing options, each with intricacies and caveats regarding accuracy and timing. Decisions regarding such testing can be difficult and are often made on the same day that testing is performed. Therefore, it is reasonable to consider that the support people brought to an appointment may have a role in the decision-making process. We aimed to better define this potential role by examining the incoming knowledge and expectations of support people who attended prenatal genetic counseling appointments. Support people were asked to complete a survey at one of seven Houston area prenatal clinics. The survey included questions regarding demographics, relationship to patient, incoming knowledge of the appointment, expectations of decision-making and perceived levels of influence over the decisions that would be made during the counseling session. The majority (79.4%) of the 252 participants were spouses/partners. Overall, there was poor knowledge of the referral indications with only 33.5% of participants correctly identifying the patient’s indication. Participants had even poorer knowledge of testing options that would be offered during the session, as only 17.7% were able to correctly identify testing options that would be discussed during the genetic counseling session. Of participants, just 3.6% said that they did not want to be included in discussions about screening/testing options. Only a few participants thought that they had less influence over decisions related to the pregnancy than over non-pregnancy decisions. Participants who reported feeling like they had a higher level of influence were likely to attend more of the pregnancy-related appointments with the patient. Findings from this study have provided insight into the perspective of support persons and have identified gaps in knowledge that may exist between the patients and the people they choose to bring with them into the genetic counseling session. In addition, this study is a starting point to assess how much the support people think that they impact the decision-making process of prenatal genetic counseling patients versus how much the prenatal patients value the input of the support people.