976 Training Oral Health Providers in Brief Motivational Interviewing: Pilot Study

Friday, March 23, 2012: 3:30 p.m. - 4:45 p.m.
Presentation Type: Poster Session
C. DEMKO1, A. KOERBER2, D. HOMENKO3, K. SISK4, and K. VICTOROFF1, 1Community Dentistry, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH, 2Pediatric Dentistry, University of Illinois - Chicago, Chicago, IL, 3Dental Hygiene and Bioethics, Cuyahoga Community College, Cleveland, OH, 4Nutrition, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH
Objective: To evaluate a brief motivational interviewing-informed educational module developed for oral health providers(OHP).

Method: A four-hour training module was developed by one author (AK) and presented in two group sessions to 34 participants. OHPs were recruited via mail/email from our practice-based research network CROWN or the Cleveland Dental Hygiene Society.   Session components included lecture, role-playing, and small group interactions.  Co-investigators facilitated small group discussions.  Participants completed pre-and 1-month post-session surveys; items were compared using a Wilcoxen signed rank test.   Written responses to a patient counseling scenario were reviewed for MI-adherent and non-adherent wording, guided by the MITI scoring system.  

Result: OHPs averaged 20.6 years (±13, range 2-45) in practice and worked 30 hours (±10, range 8-40) per week.  Thirty-two OHPs worked in private general dental offices. Ten subjects did not complete a follow-up survey; there were no differences in baseline characteristics between these 10 and those who completed the post-session survey.   Participants estimated their patient populations as 20% children, 20% elderly and 60% between 18 and 65 years old.  Nineteen participants (57%) cited lack of reimbursement for counseling time as a moderate/strong barrier to changing communication style; time to learn new skills posed a moderate barrier for 65% of OHPs.  Confidence in recognizing readiness to change, facilitating patient behavior change, and documenting change plans increased significantly from pre to post-session (Z=-3.94, p<.001).  Of 6 MI knowledge questions on the post-survey, participants averaged 4.5 correct (±1.4, range 1-6).  Twelve of 21 participants included MI-adherent wording in the patient scenario post-session compared to pre-session.

Conclusion: OHPs interested in learning and implementing brief, MI-informed communication skills in practice face several barriers.  Inclusion of MI-based techniques must not appreciably extend patient visit time. Despite increased confidence, MI-adherent responses were difficult for many participants to write. Additional training and opportunities to hone MI skills are needed.

This abstract is based on research that was funded entirely or partially by an outside source: Case Western Reserve University/Cleveland Clinic CTSA Grant Number UL1 RR024989 from the National Center for Research Resources (NCRR)

Keywords: Communication and Providers
Previous Abstract | Next Abstract >>