Motivational Interviewing: Annotated Bibliography
Barnett, E., Sussman, S., Smith, C., Rohrbach, L. A., & Spruijt-Metz, D. (2012). Motivational Interviewing for adolescent substance use: a review of the literature. Addictive behaviors, 37(12), 1325-1334. Retrieved November 19, 2016, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3496394/
Summary of the article
The author has used Motivational Interviewing (MI) as a research support to address on substance abuse among the adolescents. The key goal of the article is to investigate the manner in which MI treatments has on drug addiction among teens and the impact it has to support adolescents intrinsic motivation towards healthy lifestyles and strengthening their independence. The analysis …show more content…
Its primary goal is to determine the effectiveness of the technique for substance use on readiness to change, patient 's retention in the treatment, and the number of occurrence of convictions. The study employed randomized controlled trials where people who were dependent or abusing drugs were interviewed and subjected to various treatments. The selection criteria regarded motivational interviewing as the intervention while the outcomes were motivation for a change, continuous use of the treatment, and repeat convictions. The authors divided themselves into two groups where one was tasked to assess studies of inclusion and the other was to extract data. The results of motivational interviewing were compared with other active treatments and with no treatment control. Meta-analyses were then computed for post-intervention, short, medium and long follow-ups. The studies conducted were fifty-nine, and a total of 13,342 people participated. The results showed that motivational interviewing has an impact on drug use, which was evident at the post-intervention compared to when no treatment is given. When given on a short-term basis, the intervention showed weak results and no significant effect was realized for long follow-ups. It was also noted that MI performed better than other active interventions since no effect was recognized. The study concluded people who are treated with MI reduce their drug and substance use more than those who have not received any other treatment. It also suggested that other treatments can as well be
Barnett, E., Sussman, S., Smith, C., Rohrbach, L. A., & Spruijt-Metz, D. (2012). Motivational Interviewing for adolescent substance use: a review of the literature. Addictive behaviors, 37(12), 1325-1334. Retrieved November 19, 2016, from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3496394/
Summary of the article
The author has used Motivational Interviewing (MI) as a research support to address on substance abuse among the adolescents. The key goal of the article is to investigate the manner in which MI treatments has on drug addiction among teens and the impact it has to support adolescents intrinsic motivation towards healthy lifestyles and strengthening their independence. The analysis …show more content…
Its primary goal is to determine the effectiveness of the technique for substance use on readiness to change, patient 's retention in the treatment, and the number of occurrence of convictions. The study employed randomized controlled trials where people who were dependent or abusing drugs were interviewed and subjected to various treatments. The selection criteria regarded motivational interviewing as the intervention while the outcomes were motivation for a change, continuous use of the treatment, and repeat convictions. The authors divided themselves into two groups where one was tasked to assess studies of inclusion and the other was to extract data. The results of motivational interviewing were compared with other active treatments and with no treatment control. Meta-analyses were then computed for post-intervention, short, medium and long follow-ups. The studies conducted were fifty-nine, and a total of 13,342 people participated. The results showed that motivational interviewing has an impact on drug use, which was evident at the post-intervention compared to when no treatment is given. When given on a short-term basis, the intervention showed weak results and no significant effect was realized for long follow-ups. It was also noted that MI performed better than other active interventions since no effect was recognized. The study concluded people who are treated with MI reduce their drug and substance use more than those who have not received any other treatment. It also suggested that other treatments can as well be