The Efficacy of Motivational Interviewing: A Meta-Analysis of Controlled Clinical Trials

A meta-analysis was conducted on controlled clinical trials investigating adaptations of motivational interviewing (AMIs), a promising approach to treating problem behaviors. AMIs were equivalent to other active treatments and yielded moderate effects (from.25 to.57) compared with no treatment and/o...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Journal of consulting and clinical psychology 2003-10, Vol.71 (5), p.843-861
Main Authors: Burke, Brian L, Arkowitz, Hal, Menchola, Marisa
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
Alcohol Abuse
Behavior modification
Behavior Problems
Behavior therapy. Cognitive therapy
Behavioural problems
Biological and medical sciences
Clinical outcomes
Clinical psychology
Clinical trials
Cognitive therapy
Controlled Clinical Trials as Topic
Desintoxication. Drug withdrawal
Disorders
Drug Abuse
Eating Behavior
Effect Size (Statistical)
Exercise
Experiments
Human
Humans
Interview, Psychological
Interviewing
Interviews
Medical sciences
Medical treatment
Meta-analysis
Motivation
Motivational Interviewing
Pharmaceuticals
Psychology
Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry
Psychopathology. Psychiatry
Sexual Risk Taking
Social behaviour
Systematic review
Tobacco Smoking
Treatment
Treatments
Citations: Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
Description
Summary:A meta-analysis was conducted on controlled clinical trials investigating adaptations of motivational interviewing (AMIs), a promising approach to treating problem behaviors. AMIs were equivalent to other active treatments and yielded moderate effects (from.25 to.57) compared with no treatment and/or placebo for problems involving alcohol, drugs, and diet and exercise. Results did not support the efficacy of AMIs for smoking or HIV-risk behaviors. AMIs showed clinical impact, with 51% improvement rates, a 56% reduction in client drinking, and moderate effect sizes on social impact measures ( d = 0.47). Potential moderators (comparative dose, AMI format, and problem area) were identified using both homogeneity analyses and exploratory multiple regression. Results are compared with other review results and suggestions for future research are offered.
ISSN:0022-006X
1939-2117
DOI:10.1037/0022-006X.71.5.843