Randomized, Controlled Evaluation of a Virtual Human Patient for Provider Training in Motivational Interviewing

NCT04558060 | Completed

• 1 other identifier: DM150015
• Study Type: interventional
• Target: 126
• Locations: 0 countries
• Sites: N/A

Brief Summary

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the efficacy of training with a virtual standardized patient on the acquisition and maintenance of motivational interviewing skills compared with traditional academic study.

Conditions

Motivational Interviewing

Outcome Measures

Primary Outcomes (3)

• Difference in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 between the conditions

  The Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 is a behavioral coding system for motivational interviewing (MI) skill that involves observer ratings of 4 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale and behavior counts. The 5-point scores for Cultivating Change Talk and Softening Sustain Talk are averaged for a Technical Global summary score, and 5-point scores for Partnership and Empathy are averaged for a Relational Global summary score. Behavior counts include simple reflections, complex reflections and questions posed to patients. These behavior counts generate 2 summary scores; the percentage of reflections that are complex reflections and the ratio of reflections to questions. Participants are also categorized as meeting 'fair' and 'good' MI skill proficiency cut points for each of the 4 summary scores.

  Change in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 from Baseline to post-training [approximately 2-weeks after baseline]

• Difference in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 between the conditions

  The Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 is a behavioral coding system for motivational interviewing (MI) skill that involves observer ratings of 4 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale and behavior counts. The 5-point scores for Cultivating Change Talk and Softening Sustain Talk are averaged for a Technical Global summary score, and 5-point scores for Partnership and Empathy are averaged for a Relational Global summary score. Behavior counts include simple reflections, complex reflections and questions posed to patients. These behavior counts generate 2 summary scores; the percentage of reflections that are complex reflections and the ratio of reflections to questions. Participants are also categorized as meeting 'fair' and 'good' MI skill proficiency cut points for each of the 4 summary scores.

  Change in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 from Baseline to 3-month follow-up training [approximately 3.5-months after baseline]

• Difference in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 between the conditions

  The Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 is a behavioral coding system for motivational interviewing (MI) skill that involves observer ratings of 4 items on a 5-point Likert-type scale and behavior counts. The 5-point scores for Cultivating Change Talk and Softening Sustain Talk are averaged for a Technical Global summary score, and 5-point scores for Partnership and Empathy are averaged for a Relational Global summary score. Behavior counts include simple reflections, complex reflections and questions posed to patients. These behavior counts generate 2 summary scores; the percentage of reflections that are complex reflections and the ratio of reflections to questions. Participants are also categorized as meeting 'fair' and 'good' MI skill proficiency cut points for each of the 4 summary scores.

  Change in Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 4.2.1 from post-training [approximately 2-weeks after baseline] to 3-month follow-up training [approximately 3.5-months after baseline]

Secondary Outcomes (16)

• Difference in Helpful Responses Questionnaire between the conditions

  Change in Helpful Responses Questionnaire from Baseline to post-training [approximately 2-weeks after baseline]

• Difference in Helpful Responses Questionnaire between the conditions

  Change in Helpful Responses Questionnaire from Baseline to 3-month follow-up training [approximately 3.5-months after baseline]

• Difference in Helpful Responses Questionnaire between the conditions

  Change in Helpful Responses Questionnaire from post-training [approximately 2-weeks after baseline] to 3-month follow-up training [approximately 3.5-months after baseline]

• Difference in Motivational Interviewing Self-efficacy Scale between the conditions

  Change in Motivational Interviewing Self-efficacy Scale from Baseline to post-training [approximately 2-weeks after baseline]

• Difference in Motivational Interviewing Self-efficacy Scale between the conditions

  Change in Motivational Interviewing Self-efficacy Scale from Baseline to 3-month follow-up training [approximately 3.5-months after baseline]

Study Arms (2)

Virtual Standardized Patient

EXPERIMENTAL

Training for 45 minutes at each training time point with a computer program that presented a virtual human patient and two simulated patient encounters. The virtual standardized patient involves a branching story line. Participants select 1 of 3 computer-generated response options at each conversational pause: 1) a response that is consistent with the principles and skills of MI, 2) an MI inconsistent response, or 3) a response that is mixed - partly consistent and partly inconsistent with MI.

Other: Virtual Standardized Patient

Academic Study

ACTIVE COMPARATOR

Study of a summary handout of motivational interviewing concepts and techniques for 45-minutes.

Other: Academic Study

Interventions

Virtual Standardized Patient OTHER

Computer program that presented a virtual human patient

Virtual Standardized Patient

Academic Study OTHER

Study of a summary of motivational interviewing concepts and techniques.

Academic Study

Eligibility Criteria

• Sex: all
• Healthy Volunteers: No
• Age Groups: Child (0-17), Adult (18-64), Older Adult (65+)

You may qualify if:

• All health care staff (e.g., physicians, nurses, social workers, psychologists) from supporting service lines are eligible to participate in the study.

You may not qualify if:

• hours or more of formal training in MI in the year prior to baseline assessment.
• Successfully completed participation in the VA Evidence Based Practice roll-out of MI.
• Served as MI trainers or have conducted research on MI at any time
• Do not anticipate being available for the full duration of the training study (according to their verbal self-report)

Sponsors & Collaborators

• VA Puget Sound Health Care System: lead

Related Publications (1)

• Reger GM, Norr AM, Rizzo AS, Sylvers P, Peltan J, Fischer D, Trimmer M, Porter S, Gant P, Baer JS. Virtual Standardized Patients vs Academic Training for Learning Motivational Interviewing Skills in the US Department of Veterans Affairs and the US Military: A Randomized Trial. JAMA Netw Open. 2020 Oct 1;3(10):e2017348. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2020.17348.

  PMID: 33057643 DERIVED

Study Officials

• Greg Reger, PhD

  VA Puget Sound Health Care System

  PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR

Study Design

• Study Type: interventional
• Phase: not applicable
• Allocation: RANDOMIZED
• Masking: SINGLE
• Who Masked: OUTCOMES ASSESSOR
• Masking Details: Motivational interviewing skill is coded by assessors blind to training condition and assessment time point.
• Purpose: OTHER
• Intervention Model: PARALLEL
• Sponsor Type: FED
• Responsible Party: PRINCIPAL INVESTIGATOR
• PI Title: Deputy Associate Chief of Staff

Study Record Dates

• First Submitted: September 8, 2020
• First Posted: September 22, 2020
• Study Start: October 17, 2016
• Primary Completion: August 12, 2019
• Study Completion: August 12, 2019
• Last Updated: September 22, 2020

Record last verified: 2020-09

Data Sharing

• IPD Sharing: Will not share