MP - Introduction
Let's use the
tobacco pandemic as the leading example of how health care systems and the scientific
community underestimate the complexity of changing behavior. The tobacco pandemic
will reach its peak in 20 to 30 years and kill one in eight persons worldwide
(20 million to 30 million deaths per year), with 70% of these deaths occurring
in the developing countries. This global threat far exceeds the negative impact
of all acts of wars and terrorism, alcoholism, drug abuse and HIV disease combined.
Yet, despite these shocking facts, young people are still relentlessly initiating
this addictive, lifelong habit. We provide inadequate guidance to our youth in
how to deal with the manipulative influences of the tobacco companies, popular
media and negative peer influences. How do tobacco marketers
take this deadly product and sell it as a pleasure? They use sophisticated methods
to manipulate human beliefs (e.g., smokers deceive themselves into believing that
tobacco relieves their stress, when in fact nicotine addiction adds to it). So,
what is the power of the tobacco industry's emotional appeals? They exploit human
vulnerability by creating positive biases toward tobacco-associating images of
pleasure, sexuality and/or attractive identities with smoking and targeting this
association to an individual's needs, wants, desires, vanities, aspirations and/or
fantasies in an implicit and meaningful way. They hook youth on tobacco during
their vulnerable stages of development. They masterfully develop dynamic approaches
with new angles on positive biases to influence health beliefs and to promote
smoking behaviors. They produce spectacular results in the real world, without
generating any hard evidence from randomized controlled trials about how marketing
actually works. In contrast, the scientific approach in
health care is based on the premise of minimizing or removing biases in research
studies: in effect, taking a neutral, factual and skeptical stance, in sharp contrast
to tobacco marketers. The scientific community develops hard evidence from randomized
controlled trials, but this evidence does not translate into significant results
at a population-based level. For example, the smoking cessation guideline that
uses the five A's model (ask, advise, assist, assess and arrange follow-up) relies
on practitioners providing information and advice to patients. The impact of this
guideline on cessation rates varies from 2-10%, depending on the duration of the
intervention. But this guideline doesn't use sophisticated emotional appeals and
negative biases against tobacco use, a strategy that goes against the grain of
scientific impartiality of being bias-neutral. Because the factual evidence does
not support it, the guideline provides little assistance in how practitioners
can
Work with adolescent smokers
Help smokers in precontemplation
Motivate patients who do not respond to the five A's approach Many
practitioners tire of or stop using this guideline protocol in any systematic
way, for a variety of legitimate reasons. What we need are new, dynamic and innovative
ways of engaging all smokers in the change process, using the best available evidence
and state-of the-art practices. In particular, we can use emotional appeals and
biases that marketers use for tobacco initiation and apply them in the opposite
direction to help patients work on the emotional aspects of tobacco cessation.
But these techniques alone are not sufficient, because tobacco cessation is far
more complex than its initiation. In addition to treating nicotine addiction,
we need more sophisticated behavioral interventions. One approach (based on multiple
methods) can be found in motivational practice. This approach provides practitioners
with a wide range of interventions to address smoking cessation and other behaviors
such as
Risk behaviors: excessive alcohol use, illegal
drug use, obesity, unhealthy diets, lack
of exercise, unsafe sex and unwanted pregnancies
Disease management: nonadherence to medication
and treatment recommendations,
suboptimal self-care of chronic diseases and failure to attend follow-up
appointments Preventive
measures: immunizations, mammogram and pap smears and injury prevention WHAT
IS MOTIVATIONAL PRACTICE? This interdisciplinary
book addresses how practitioners can learn to develop individualized interventions
that meet patients' changing needs over time. The clinical approach of motivational
practice builds on the shoulders of these trailblazers:
Self-efficacy theory: A. Bandura1-4
Transtheoretical model of change: J. Prochaska and C. DiClemente5-7
Motivational interviewing: W. Miller and S. Rollnick8;9
Self-determination theory: E. Deci and R. Ryan10
Relapse prevention: G. Marlatt and J.Gordon11
Solution-based therapy: S. De Shazer12-15
Patient-centered approaches: M. Steward and colleagues16 No
single theory, model or clinical approach has a monopoly on clinical effectiveness
in predicting positive outcomes, but clearly some clinical approaches peak in
popularity, and some fade over time as the field advances. The concept of self-efficacy
has shown some durability but it has limitations (as described in Chapter 7).
A systematic review (www.ncchta.org/fullmono/mon624.pdf)
of interventions based on the stages of change model has questioned its effectiveness
in promoting behavior change. Motivational interviewing has gained stature and
popularity with a supportive foundation of evidence. (For those interested in
exploring different perspectives on evidence and the concept of translational
research, go to www.MotivateHealthyHabits.com to download two chapters that address
these issues in more detail.) To assist you with the limitations
of current evidence, this book incorporates state-of-the art clinical practices
and learning processes that involve
Using continuous innovation, testing and evaluation of individualized interventions
Applying motivational
principles for overcoming the knowledge-behavior gap (e.g.,
"I know what to do but I don't do it")
Developing the art of dialogue (nonlinear, dynamic processes) to address cognitive-emotional
dissonance (e.g., "I think I should change but don't feel like it")
and so-called irrational behavior
Incorporating learning portfolios (e.g., gathering personal evidence about developing
motivational skills) into your continuing professional development Consider
exploring your professional role, mental maps (ways of thinking) and assumptions
before developing your motivational skills. This premise may help you learn how
to work more effectively and efficiently with patients. You may even have to unlearn
some of your training-of-origin perspectives so that you can expand your repertoire
of skills. This process can challenge your assumptions and evoke emotional reactions,
such as ambivalence or even resistance to the introspective process.
Instead of imposing a concept/model/theory-driven worldview on patients, you learn
how to work from the patients' worldviews and select theories and models that
fit into their worldviews rather than the other way around-making patients fit
into a particular mould. This learning process can help you develop individualized
interventions that activate patients to become researchers of their own behavior
change and learn new ways of acting in their best interest. Do
not quench your inspiration and your imagination; do not become the slave
of your model -Vincent Van Gogh May this quotation
inspire your creativity and sustain your enthusiasm for lifelong learning on how
to help patients change. REFERENCES
1. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: The exercise
of control. New York: W.H. Freeman; 1997 2. Bandura A. Self-efficacy in changing
societies. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1995 3.
Bandura A. Social foundations of thought and action. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice
Hall; 1986 4. Bandura A. Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying
theory of behavior change. Psychological Review 1977;84:
191-215 5. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Toward a comprehensive model of change.
In: Miller WR, Heather N, eds. Treating addictive behaviors:
Processes of change. New York: Plenum Press; 1986:3-276.
6. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. The transtheoretical approach: Crossing traditional
boundaries of therapy. Homewood, IL: Dow Jones/Irwin;
1984 7. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more
integrative model of change. Psychotherapy Theory,
Research and Practice 1982;19: 276-288 8. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational
interviewing: Preparing people to change addictive behavior.
New York: Guilford Press; 1991 9. Miller W, Rollnick S, Conforti K. Motivational
interviewing, 2nd Edition: Preparing People for Change.
New York: Guilford Press; 2002 10. Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and
self-determination in human behavior. New
York: Plenum Press; 1985 11. Marlatt GA, Gordon JR. Determinants of relapse:
Implications for the maintenance of behavior
change. In: Davidson P, Davidson S, eds. Behavioral medicine: Changing health
lifestyles. New York: Brunner/Mezel, Inc.; 1980:410-452 12. De Shazer S. Words
were originally magic. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.; 1994 13. De Shazer
S. Putting difference to work. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.; 1991 14. De
Shazer S. Clues: Investigating solutions in brief therapy. New York: W.W. Norton
& Co.; 1988 15. De Shazer S. Keys
to solutions in brief therapy. New York: W.W. Norton & Co.; 1985 16. Stewart
M, Brown JB, Weston WW, et al. Patient-centered medicine: Transforming the clinical
method. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995 SECTION
I CONSIDER CHANGING YOURSELF BEFORE HELPING
OTHERS Chapter 1 invites you to learn about improving
your own health behaviors and transforming your professional role before learning
how to help patients change. A case study in Chapter 2 contrasts how a fix-it
and a motivational practitioner deal with the same patient. The purpose of this
example is to emphasize the advantages of a new role rather than to illustrate
the limitations of the traditional role for addressing behavior change. Chapter
3 describes a conceptual framework for better understanding how you can adapt
your role to meet patients' needs. Chapter 4 explores how assumptions can either
hinder or facilitate the change process for patients and their families. Over
time, you can discover for yourself whether this premise (change yourself before
helping others) helped you become a more effective and efficient motivational
practitioner.
CHAPTER 1 WHEN
GIVING HEALTH INFORMATION AND ADVICE DOESN'T WORK FOR
REFLECTION
What do you do when patients do not
change their unhealthy behaviors in response to your health information and
advice? OVERVIEW
When
we use only a hammer (provide advice), we treat patients' unhealthy behaviors
as nails. Most patients and their behaviors, however, are more like nuts and bolts
rusted together. Hammering away can damage the threads of the bolt, so the nut
never comes off. With advice only, patients may become more resistant and less
likely to consider change. Do you keep hammering away,
give up the advice-giving approach altogether, or do you learn from your clinical
experiences about how to work with patients in alternative ways? Mere
knowledge about the negative consequences of risk behaviors is insufficient to
motivate most patients to change. Even when individuals know what is good for
them and have the skills to change, many do not. Resistant patients work against
our attempts to help them change. Unmotivated ones are indifferent to change.
Ambivalent patients have mixed thoughts and feelings about change. Thus,
most patients are not ready to change their unhealthy behaviors. They may or may
not even be thinking about change.1;2 Not surprisingly,
health information and advice do not help most patients to change. We need to
develop skills to help our patients work on changing over time. This
book invites you to consider learning about how you change yourself as you learn
how to help patients change. It encourages you to consider
Analyzing your health behaviors, professional roles and assumptions
Internalizing the six-step approach (described in Sections II and III) as a mental
map for
working with patients over time
Initiating the process of gathering a learning portfolio for your continuing professional
development Learning
micro skills to address tobacco use and excessive alcohol intake If
you are curious about why patients do or do not change, this book may assist you
on a journey of lifelong learning about motivating health behavior change. LIMITATIONS
OF GIVING INFORMATION AND ADVICE
What is the impact
of giving health information and advice to patients, in relation to the overall
magnitude of unhealthy behaviors and their consequences? (Section IV in this book
and the Web sites listed in the tables and footnotes provide additional evidence
for using such interventions. abcd) Such approaches
are the first step in helping patients change their unhealthy behaviors, but they
benefit only 5-20% of patients.3-10 Let's briefly
focus on the tobacco issue again, because it is the single greatest preventable
contributor to disease and premature death internationally. In community surveys
conducted in the United States, 40% of smokers are not thinking about quitting,
and 40% of smokers are thinking about it.11-14
Giving information and advice may be appropriate for only 20% of smokers who are
ready to quit. This approach helps 2.3-12.8% of smokers to quit, depending on
the time length of the session, the total number of sessions and the number of
different clinicians involved in delivering interventions.3
Consider this fact in relation to the tobacco pandemic,
as described in the Introduction. The report Trust Us: We're the Tobacco Industry
helps us to understand how the tobacco industry contributed toward creating this
pandemic e. To counteract these disease-promoting
practices, the World Health Organization's Tobacco Free Initiative (http://www.who.int/toh)
and the Framework Convention on Tobacco control aim to decrease global tobacco
consumption. Yet in spite of our knowledge about this problem, tobacco use will
remain the leading cause of death worldwide for the foreseeable future. Giving
information and advice does not always change behavior. Furthermore, this seemingly
helpful approach can have negative consequences that may or may not be apparent.15;16
For example, increases in depression, anxiety and overall disability occurred
at three months after physicians advised patients to quit smoking, but this finding
was not found with medication-related or dietary change advice.15;16
Two examples highlight this issue from a practitioner and patient perspective: | Dr.
N., a general practitioner from Nepal, was treating a patient who was a smoker
and a doctor. Dr. N. advised his patient to quit smoking on three separate occasions
over time. The patient got fed up with Dr. N. and decided to see another doctor,
a doctor who smoked cigarettes and would not advise him to quit smoking. Dr. N.
felt rejected and wished that he could have been more helpful to his patient.
He was interested in learning more about how to work with smokers in alternative
ways. Mrs. D. was an overweight middle-aged woman who
had diabetes. Her overweight endocrinologist repeatedly advised her to change
her eating habits, to lose weight and to exercise more. She could not live up
to her doctor's expectations and had resigned herself that she would need to rely
on her medications to control her diabetes. Mrs. D. had mixed feelings about continuing
to see the endocrinologist because he made her feel guilty, but she also respected
him and depended on him for her ongoing care. Mrs. D. resented his lack of empathy,
given that he was also overweight, and wished that he was better trained in how
to understand her situation. |
Michael
Balint once stated that doctors are the most commonly prescribed drug in general
practice.17 This drug metaphor has merit in acknowledging
the psychotherapeutic impact of the doctor, but its literal interpretation highlights
how we fail to resolve behavior change issues effectively with our patients. Giving
rational advice to patients about changing unhealthy behaviors is on a par with
the placebo impact of 19th-century drugs. The use of this "drug" over
and over again, when it is clearly not working, could be regarded as a form of
medical error. LIMITATIONS OF THE BEST
EVIDENCE In helping our patients change, we should
always use the best available evidence from randomized controlled trials (RCTs).
However, most behavioral RCTs conducted in primary care provide limited guidance
in how to help patients change, because they use only one or two health information
and advice-giving interventions with patients, with time-limited follow-up, for
a year or so. Such rational interventions are the most frequently studied for
tobacco cessation in primary care.4;6;18-21 Doctors
are encouraged to use these approaches routinely and repeatedly with all smokers
at each visit, but this does not happen in practice. Doctors
prefer to give advice to patients who have smoking-related problems or who are
ready to quit; conversely, they avoid confronting patients who do not fit into
this group.22-25 Such avoidance has some justification:
patients react negatively or prefer not to get such advice.26;27
For these and other reasons, the feasibility of implementing these guidelines
has been questioned.28 Furthermore,
rational interventions do not work for the majority of patients because they are
simply not ready to take action. Evidence-based tobacco cessation guidelines tell
us what works, but they don't tell us how to work with people when proven interventions
fail. Something is missing in the conduct of RCTs in terms of dealing with the
full spectrum of patients. RCTs rarely address the internal process of why change
did or did not occur. They do not tell us the whole story about change, either
from the practitioner's or the patient's perspective. Instead, they provide a
very limited view for understanding human experience and behavior change. With
unhealthy behaviors, emotions often supersede reason. Patients frequently decide
that the short-term emotional benefits (e.g., smoking to relax) are more important
than the long-term quantifiable benefits (e.g., live longer). They make so-called
"irrational" decisions. Recommendations from RCTs provide no guidance
on how to deal with human emotions, perceptions and values. Scientific rationality
lacks sophistication in dealing with human irrationality and otherwise knowledgeable
patients who lack the critical factor: motivation. ADOPTING
NEW METAPHORS Metaphors can help us understand better the
gaps between scientific evidence and the complexity of dealing with individual
patients' unhealthy behaviors. Here is a visual metaphor to illustrate the gaps
in our understanding: RCTs are tiny square pegs in a large round hole. The hole
(gaps in our understanding) simply gets bigger with each additional peg. No matter
how many pegs are put into the hole, the gaps in our understanding will remain
between rational evidence and the emotional complexity of issues affecting behavior
change. Evidence-based medicine alone will never close all the gaps. Metaphors
that shape our professional behavior toward patients are embedded in our everyday
language.29 Here are some metaphors that make
explicit our fix-it approach toward our patients: "Medical care is a high-tech
machine in a competitive market manufacturing magic bullets [e.g., drugs] to cure
diseases."30;31 These mechanistic metaphors
suggest objectivity, predictability, beating the competition, winning, cure, war,
control and death. Here, as a complementary worldview,
are ecological metaphors that expand the narrow focus of medical care:30
"Health care is an endangered plant in a threatened ecosystem that needs
environmental restoration; in addition to the fix-it role, we adopt a motivational
role and become 'gardeners': cultivating the soil, fertilizing the ground, and
planting seeds." These organismic metaphors suggest subjectivity, unpredictability,
sharing interdependence, collaboration, care, growth, nurture and quality of life.
Changing the dominant metaphors in medical care, however, is a major paradigm
shift and no simple task. Metaphors can act as weapons against change, as well
as agents for change. The underlying value system of the mechanistic metaphors
in health care that work against mainstreaming organismic ones are summarized
in Table 1.1. Table 1.1. Comparing
Medical and Behavioral Worldviews and Value Systems
Quick-fix:
Treating Diseases | Long
Haul: Motivating Healthy Behaviors | 1.
Address complicated, decontextualized tasks Use "closed
system" approach 2. Focus on objectivity and entities 3. Use mechanistic
thinking "Technicians using tools" 4.
Use reductionist and linear approaches Apply scientific
rationality 5. Intervene in symptomatic phase Patients depend
on their practitioners 6. Control and cure diseases Practitioners save lives 7.
Focus on harms, deficits and pathology 8. Use high-tech treatments (drugs and
surgery) Static, prescribed interventions 9. Produce
dramatic results Immediate benefits |
1. Address complex, contextualized tasks Use "open
system" approach 2. Focus on subjectivity and context 3. Use organismic
thinking "Gardeners planting seeds" 4.
Use holistic and nonlinear approaches Address human
irrationality 5. Intervene in asymptomatic phase Patients start
thinking about change 6. Support autonomy to influence behavior Activate
patients to take charge 7. Address emotions, perceptions and values 8. Employ
low-tech interventions (dialogue) Dynamic, changing
interventions 9. Foster incremental change Delayed
benefits |
THE NEED FOR
A COMPLEMENTARY APPROACH Modern drug research emphasizes
purposeful nonvariation, that is, developing highly specific drugs to target particular
enzymes, receptor sites or genes to treat and cure diseases. Unlike the development
of drugs, purposeful variation is needed to design highly individualized behavioral
interventions to enhance their potency and impact on patients. The "receptor
site" is not only different for each patient but also for each of his or
her unhealthy behaviors. In spite of the diversity of patient needs, we tend to
fall into the trap of using the one-size-fits-all approach.
For this reason, the top-down, "from research to practice," rational
choice model, while important in determining what works in some circumstances,32
has a limited impact, because evidence-based guidelines don't teach practitioners
how to attend to the diversity of emotions, perceptions and values that affect
patients' health behaviors.33 With the top-down
approach, researchers often try to make patients fit a particular theory: in effect,
a controlling method. The researcher is the principal investigator, and practitioners
are coinvestigators ostensibly working with patients but in effect telling them
what to do. The following quotation provides another perspective about the limitation
of this approach. | Rational
planning and decision-making are doomed to failure in the face of the remarkable
complexity of human motivation, encompassing interlocking hurts, disappointments,,
confusions, affections and aspirations.34 |
We need to use a bottom-up, "from practice to research"
approach if we are to help our patients close the large gap between evidence and
practice and to work with the discrepancy between so-called rationality and their
emotions. With the bottom-up approach, the patient is the principal investigator
researching his or her health behavior change, and the practitioner is the coinvestigator
working with researchers to select theories that fit the particular needs of the
patient. We should also move beyond hierarchy
(the top-down, one-way-street approach) and toward partnerships if we want to
develop innovative approaches to health care and behavior change. It is vitally
important that researchers, theorists and practitioners collaborate in a two-way
street to develop partnerships with patients. Patient-centered approaches can
help to develop such partnerships and enhance the process and outcome of health
care.35;36 The motivational
approach described in this book adds to the patient-centered concept, which addresses
concerns, feelings, expectations and consequences relevant to episodes about their
care and describes how to develop individualized interventions that help patients
change their perceptions and values. To encourage such partnerships, this approach
has been developed from state-of-the-art clinical practices (working with patients,
students and health care practitioners), research evidence and different theories
and models (described in Chapters 6 and 7) about health behavior change.37-39
Emerging research findings and clinical reviews provide some encouraging evidence
to justify using motivational approaches.40-72
(Some Web sites to help you keep abreast of this developing field are listed below.
f)
For those of us working with providing continuity of care to our patients, we
have many opportunities to adopt a motivational approach and deliver individualized
interventions that meet their changing needs over several years. Effective training
methods can help us move beyond standard question-and-answer clinical interviews
to engage patients in "change dialogues" so they not only adopt healthy
behaviors but maintain these changes. 37-39;73
(The Web site www.MotivateHealthyHabits.com is under
continuous development to improve the training methods for helping both practitioners
and patients learn how to work more efficiently on this change process.) LIMITATIONS
OF THE FIX-IT ROLE Clinical experience can teach us
a lot about the shortcomings of our professional training and the limitations
of the advice-giving, or fix-it, approach. When we adopt this approach, we impose
our own values and perceptions about healthy behavior without knowing what our
patients think. We give answers rather than ask questions. The
following account provided by Dr. W., a family physician, reveals the limitations
of the fix-it approach and highlights the advantages of a motivational approach.
Over a nine-year period, Dr. W. struggled before figuring out how best to work
with resistant patients. He shared this account of his professional experience
after attending a workshop on motivating health behavior change. After
graduating from a family practice residency program, I spent the first three years
getting frustrated with patients when dealing with their risk behaviors and the
next three years confused about what I should do with them. For the next three
years, I really took the time to listen to my patients and learn from them about
what it would take for them to change. After being in practice for nine years,
I don't go home worrying about any patient's self-destructive behavior. This
kind of workshop could have helped me learn much earlier about how to individualize
my approach in working with patients over time. I wish I had had this training
in medical school. It could have prevented many years of frustration and confusion
because I would not have given the same kind of health education and advice messages
over and over again to patients |
Dr. W.
first assumed a fix-it role and acted as though he could make patients change
their risk behaviors. This take-charge approach works well for treating diseases,
but it plays a limited role in addressing risk behaviors; directive or controlling
advice works with only a minority of patients. Dr. W.'s clinical experiences taught
him a lesson: trying to control patients' behavior usually does not work. A version
of the Serenity Prayer by Reinhold Niebuhr-a Protestant theologian and social
critic born in 1892-reinforces the lesson that experience taught Dr. W.: Grant
me the serenity to accept the things I cannot change, the courage to change
the things I can, and the wisdom to know the difference.74
Dr. W. typifies how most of us have been trained
to adopt a fix-it role for working with resistant patients. This educational shortcoming
handicaps our professional development and creates a blind spot in our learning.
Clinical experiences after completing his training taught Dr. W. how to adopt
a motivational approach. He did this by carefully listening to, and learning from,
his patients. By doing this, he became more effective at helping them change their
behavior. The key differences between fix-it and
motivational approaches to behavior change are summarized in Table 1.2.38;75
Fix-it practitioners, for example, erroneously assume that they can control patients'
behavior, whereas motivational practitioners realize that only patients can take
charge of their health. Motivational practitioners thus help patients explore
the possibility of change, rather than try to control the patient. Table
1.2. Contrasting Assumptions about Patients
Fix-it
Approaches | Motivational
Approaches | Patients need to act
now. They lack knowledge about the need to change. Education
will convince patients to change. They need advice to change. | Patients
may not yet be ready for action. They lack motivation to change. They
have knowledge and skills to change. Most patients are willing to explore
change. |
MOTIVATING CHANGE Opportunities
for motivating healthy behaviors occur in almost every patient encounter.76
Yet most of us are poorly trained to take advantage of such opportunities. Furthermore,
the development of simple yet sophisticated interventions for motivating healthy
behaviors over time (particularly in nonspecialist, time-pressured health care
settings) has lagged far behind the advances in drug treatment of diseases. This
lag is especially significant, given that an estimated 50% of preventable mortality
is due to unhealthy behaviors.77 Carl
Rogers, a seminal thinker about human psychology, captures an essential ingredient
for motivating change-listening: | We
think we listen, but very rarely do we listen with real understanding, true empathy.
Yet listening, of this very special kind, is one of the most potent forces for
change that I know.78 |
In
many instances, listening with empathy is a prerequisite for helping patients
to change. Paolo Freire, a radical contemporary educator, builds on this fundamental
principle by emphasizing another critical ingredient needed to work toward effective
action:79;80 Listening
precedes Dialogue, which precedes Action. Freire's
aphorism highlights the need to engage patients in constructive dialogue about
change in order to motivate them to action. Motivational
practitioners appreciate that each person is unique in what might motivate him
or her to change. These practitioners use motivational principles (see Table 1.3)
as a guide to engaging patients in the change process over time and work through
the three phases of Freire's aphorism (listening, dialogue, action), whereas fix-it
practitioners jump in at the action phase. Table
1.3. Motivational
Principles |
Develop empathic relationships with patients Clarify roles and
responsibilities for health behavior change· Gain consent from patients
to address behavior change Respect
patients' autonomy-use influence, not control, to effect change
Work at a pace sensitive to the patients' needs and their readiness to change
Help patients explore and understand better their values and perceptions
Help patients decide whether to change their values and perceptions
Focus on strengths, successes and health, not weaknesses, failures and pathology
Focus on solutions rather than on problems Enhance patients' confidence
and competence to change (self-efficacy) Negotiate reasonable
goals for change Help patients believe that healthy outcomes are
possible Help patients increase their supports and reduce their
barriers to change. Develop plans to prevent relapses and use
so-called failures as learning opportunities |
Attempts
to force patients to act in healthy ways when they are not ready can sometimes
have the opposite effect.81;82 For example, if
you are a parent, consider the last time that you gave strong, directive advice
to your children (especially teenagers) about changing their behavior. Or recollect
when you were a teenager and were told not to do something by your parents or
teachers. Sometimes you did it anyway! Years later, you realized that their advice
was right, but how did you feel about the advice at the time it was given? Controlling
or threatening messages, such as providing highly directive advice - "Do
this . . . you should . . . or else"- often proves counterproductive. Individuals
may become even more resistant in response to such controlling advice. Strong
unsolicited advice, even if logical, can bring out the rebellious teenager in
all of us. We must move beyond the idea of control,83
that is, beyond trying to control our patients or having patients control themselves,
to the idea of autonomy.84 Patients are more
likely to adopt healthy behaviors if they want to rather than if they ought to
or have to change. Over time, patients are more likely to behave in healthy ways
if we openly acknowledge their choice to engage in an unhealthy behavior rather
than trying to make them change. Autonomy-supportive approaches (offering choices)
are more effective in helping patients change than are coercive measures.84
Examples of the distinctions between controlling and autonomy-supportive approaches
are interspersed throughout this book.85 CONSIDER
CHANGING YOURSELF Consider taking a step back from changing
patients' behaviors to focus on your own health behaviors, professional roles
and assumptions. Learning from your attempts to change your personal and professional
behaviors may help you empathize and work more effectively with your patients.
This suggestion is important for another reason. Our health habits affect how
we work with patients. Physicians with healthy behaviors (e.g., nonsmoking, low-risk
drinking or abstinence, regular exercise) are more likely to counsel patients
about the same behaviors.86-90 In a few countries,
an overall decline in the smoking rate was preceded by a decline in the smoking
rate among physicians. Yet the smoking rate among health care professionals remains
high in many countries. Perhaps the health care professions can indeed do a better
job of helping its members develop healthier habits. No one, of course, is perfect.
We all have something that we could do to improve our health (healthy diets, weight
reduction and more exercise). Mohandas K. Gandhi emphasized
the importance of beginning with oneself when addressing change: | Be
the change that you want to see in the world. I have only three enemies. My favorite
enemy, the one most easily influenced for the better, is the British Empire. My
second enemy, the Indian people, is far more difficult. But my most formidable
opponent is a man named Mohandas K. Gandhi. With him I seem to have very little
influence. |
An important take-home message
is that you may find it easier to influence patients to change than to change
your own family members, or even yourself. The inner process
of learning how to change your health behaviors and how to become a motivational
practitioner can accelerate the outer process of expanding your depth and range
of motivational skills and of developing individualized interventions to meet
your patients' changing needs. This premise, however, can be threatening or seem
irrelevant or unnecessary to some practitioners, so they avoid exploring personal
or professional issues about self-change. As you read through the next section
of this chapter, assess your internal reactions about the extent to which you
have positive, negative or mixed responses to different aspects of this premise
or this chapter. In what ways are your internal reactions similar or different
from some of your patients? Practitioner
Example of Internal "Mixed" Reactions: A general practitioner
from Bergen, Norway, felt that this chapter was persuasive about promoting healthy
habits but also expressed concerns about practitioners "overdoing it"
with their patients and acting as health care imperialists. Commentary:
These concerns speak to a crucial issue about the differences between autonomy-supportiveness
and behaviorally controlling ways. This chapter introduces the motivational principle
of autonomy-supportiveness, but some practitioners may not fully understand how
to put this principle into practice and may unknowingly act in controlling ways
that are antithetical to this principle. In effect, they fall into the trap of
health care imperialism. At the other extreme, we fall into the enabling trap-acting
as our patients' unconditional advocates to support their choice to do as they
please, without setting any limits. As a middle way between these extremes, we
can support patients' autonomy without either of us abandoning or imposing our
health care values. Instead of becoming immobilized by this ethical dilemma, we
can respect, explore and work with our differences in values with our patients,
all, of course, with their explicit consent or implicitly based on mutual trust. |
Now,
if you wish, consider identifying a professional or personal issue that you want
to change. Much can be learned from your attempt to unravel the individual and
contextual factors that shape this behavior-doing so may help both you and your
patients. Kurt Lewin succinctly captures the essence of this kind of learning
opportunity: If you want to understand
something, try to change it.91 Personal
Change: Your Health Behaviors and Life Situation Personal
health habits influence our professional behavior. Practitioners with unhealthy
behaviors (e.g., lack of exercise, unhealthy diet and overeating, causing obesity)
are less likely to counsel patients who have the same behaviors. This is yet another
reason why it's important to address change by beginning with yourself. Learning
Exercise 1.1 helps you reflect about changing yourself as a way to understanding
yourself. Such self-understanding can help you become a more effective motivational
practitioner with patients. Find out where you stand by completing the exercise.
Learning Exercise 1.1. Assess
your overall health behaviors and life issues Complete
the questionnaires for 10 Health Behaviors and 10 Life issues. Circle
N or Y for each health decision. N = Not
applicable to me.
Y = Yes. For
each yes response, use this readiness-to-change" scale: 1=
not thinking about change 2
= thinking about change 3
= preparing to change Health
Behaviors and Life Issue | A
Self-evaluation | Self-assessment | Readiness
to change | | 1. Tobacco
use | N Y
| 1
2 3 | | 2. Eating
habits | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 3. Weight | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 4.
Physical activity | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 5. Alcohol
use | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 6. Illegal
drug use | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 7. Safe
sex practices | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 8. Contraception
to prevent pregnancy | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 9. Regular
use of prescribed drugs | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 10. Safety
belt use and bicycle helmets | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 11. Social
relationships | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 12. Job satisfaction | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 13. Financial
situation | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 14. Work/family/social
balance | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 15. Professional/personal
overfunctioning | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 16. Physical
and sexual abuse | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 17. Emotional
health | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 18. Coping
with stress | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 19. Environmental
health (work/home) | N
Y
| 1
2 3 | | 20. Spiritual
health | N
Y
| 1
2 3 |
For
each health behavior and life situation of concern (those circled "Y"),
complete the scale of your readiness to change. Look at each concern where you're
not thinking about change or are thinking about it but are unsure what to do.
Questions to Ponder:
How long have you been thinking about change?
What is holding you back? What is keeping your foot nailed to the floor in addressing
change? Think about a recent time when someone did not follow your advice
to address a health concern. Question to Ponder:
How does your previous analysis of difficulties in changing your own behavior
help you understand why it can be so difficult for someone else to change, especially
when it is an issue that is not a concern for you personally? Think
about the occasions when a health issue came up with someone you know: a patient,
colleague, family member or friend. Questions
to Ponder: How was your behavior in this interaction
influenced by your own health choices? Can you see any positive or negative patterns
in the ways that you interact with others, for better or worse?
You
may even need some additional assistance to address some behaviors such as lack
of exercise, unhealthy diet or even overwork. If so, you may find it helpful to
use Motivate Healthy Habits: Stepping Stones to Lasting Change (a self-guided
change version of this book) to work on your behaviors.92
Your personal experience of using it can then help you to help your patients learn
how to use this guidebook with or without your ongoing support. Professional
Change: Roles, Perspectives and Mental Models We
need to incorporate new similes and metaphors into well-established ones. The
mechanistic similes (hammer and nails, nuts and bolts) used at the beginning of
this chapter only tell practitioners to stop using the fix-it role when health
information and advice doesn't work. As previously noted, the machine and gardener
metaphors characterize the fix-it and motivational roles respectively. Organic
metaphors can help us move beyond the toolbox metaphors; it is not just a question
of picking up a new tool. These metaphors more aptly capture how we need to work
in addressing health behavior change with our patients. This process also involves
professional change: changing your roles appropriately, learning about different
perspectives on resistance and motivation and using mental maps for developing
individualized interventions to meet your patients' changing needs over time.
Changing roles An
understanding about different roles (motivational, preventive and fix-it) lays
the foundation for learning how to enhance your skills at motivating behavior
change. (Chapters 2-4 present these three roles in detail and describe how different
roles can have both positive and negative impacts on our work with patients.)
A brief description about the distinctions between these roles will help you to
understand why it is important to change your role before developing new skills.
The term agent of change is used figuratively
to clarify different roles that you may assume in working with patients. Practitioner-centered
advice is the agent of change for fix-it roles. Such advice is based on what practitioners
think patients should be given, rather than on what patients may prefer or need.
In a preventive role, education tailored to the needs of patients becomes the
agent of change. In a motivational role, you work with, rather than against, indifferent
or resistant patients. Your dialogue with patients becomes the agency of change.
You use such dialogue (together with a motivational assessment) to help develop
individualized interventions to meet patients' changing needs over time.
The fix-it role is more appropriate for treating diseases
caused by risk behaviors (e.g., giving antibiotics for acute bronchitis) than
it is for helping patients change risk behaviors (e.g., giving advice to quit
smoking). If we remain in a fix-it role, we may persist in providing more information
and advice to resistant, indifferent and ambivalent patients than they want. This
situation can evoke mutual frustration in addition to possible anger and guilt
and become such a negative experience that patients may avoid us or fail to seek
appropriate care. Learning about resistance
and motivation Patient resistance is a normal
and expected phenomenon, but it is also a learning opportunity to understand why
patients resist change in spite of our good intentions to help them. We are often
on different wavelengths from our patients. Unless we change our wavelength, we
cancel out each other's energy, so nothing happens but perpetual inertia and wariness.
How can you motivate these patients to change? First, learn how to adapt your
role to meet patients' needs. Different perspectives on resistance and motivation
(Chapters 5-7) can help you learn how to work with resistance, rather than work
against it. Then you are in a better position to help patients redirect their
energy in healthy directions. Internalizing
the six-step approach as a mental map A mental
map is a framework or way of thinking derived from internalizing a model. You
can use the six-step approach (summarized in Table 1.4 and explained in Chapters
8-14) as a mental map for negotiating about behavior change with patients. Even
if you internalize this map, it does not mean that you are skillful in navigating
the territory-in this case, the patient's world. Always keep in mind that the
map is not the territory.93
It is just a guide, but it can help you learn to negotiate an appropriate rate
at which to work through the change process with your patients.94
In addition, a mental map can help you learn how to use words, language and dialogue
more effectively in working with your patients. With repeated practice in using
this guide, you can become more effective over time in developing individualized
interventions for your patients. Table
1.4. Six-step Approach for Negotiating Change | Mental
Map for Negotiating Change | Desired Impact on Patients | Step
1: Building a partnership Step 2: Negotiating an agenda | Helps
patients move from not thinking about change to thinking about it. | Step
3: Assessing resistance and motivation Step 4: Enhancing mutual understanding | Helps
patients move from thinking about change to preparing to change. | | Step
5: Implementing a plan | Helps patients move from preparing
to change to taking action. | | Step 6:
Following through | Helps patients move from taking action to
maintaining change. |
Patients have good reasons
for their health decisions, but you may disagree with their logic. To work with
the so-called irrationality, you need to work with patients at the level of their
perceptions and values. A decision balance (used in Step 3) is a simple tool that
can help you do this. This tool can help your patients organize their thoughts
about staying the same (resistance) versus changing (motivation), and uncover
what lies beneath their thoughts about change: emotions, perceptions and values.
If you understand how their values affect their perceptions, and in turn their
behaviors, you will at least understand their decision-making process. The example
below illustrates how you can use this tool to understand so-called human irrationality
when seeing your patients in your office. | Resistance
to the Practice of Safe Sex: Mrs. S., a 45-year-old woman, came to her
family physician (Dr. M.) for a follow-up to her HIV test. Two years ago, she
remarried after being divorced for many years. She had recently moved back to
her hometown after her husband broke his parole and was returned to jail. Mr.
and Mrs. S. had regularly attended an HIV clinic because Mr. S. was HIV-positive.
Even though Mrs. S. knew how to put a condom on her husband, he did not want to
wear one. Fortunately, she remained HIV-negative even without practicing safe
sex. The doctor at the HIV clinic had advised Mrs. S. to have an HIV test done
every three months. Dr. M. ordered the HIV test and asked her if she would be
willing to fill out a decision balance in order to better understand why she did
not want to use condoms. Dr. M. saw another patient while Mrs. S. completed this
task, and then returned to see what she had written. |
Learning
Exercise 1.2. Reflect on Mrs. S.'s decision balanc Reflect
on the following questions as you read Mrs. S.'s decision balance.
How does she perceive her reasons to stay the same versus her reasons to change,
based on how she thinks and feels? What does she feel about her husband?
What does she feel about herself? How does she value her relationship
as compared to herself and her own family?
Then analyze her decision balance. The left column represents Mrs. S.'s reasons
to stay the same, and the right column represents her reasons to change. |
Mrs.
S.'s Decision Balance about Safe Sex | Reasons
not to use condoms (resistance) | Reasons to use condoms (motivation) | | 1.
Benefits of not using condomsNot make him feel he is failing at being sexually
competent.He feels secure that I'll stay with him. | 2. Concerns
about not using condomsDon't want HIV.Don't want my family hurt.Maybe people will
think he doesn't care to protect me. | 3. Concerns
about using condomsHe will have erection problems and it will make him sad.He
will wish he were with his ex-girlfriend (who is HIV) so he won't have to use
them.
| 4. Benefits of using condomsWon't get HIV so won't
upset family.Won't get sick myself so I can take care of him when he gets sicker.Will
feel that he cares enough about me and will not allow me to get sick. | Resistance
Score = 9 Feeling score = 9 Think score = 6 | Motivation
Score = 4 Feeling score = 4 Think score = 8 |
Assessing
Mrs. S.'s perceptions about her resistance and motivation: When Dr. M.
reentered the room, he read what Mrs. S. wrote and first pointed to the left-hand
column of her decision balance. He asked her to use a scale from 0 to 10 (0 =
not important and 10 = very important) to rate her overall reasons for not using
condoms. Mrs. S. gave a resistance score of 9. Dr. M. then asked to rate her reasons
for using them. She gave a motivation score of 4. Dr. M. asked her whether her
scores were based on her feelings or her thoughts. Mrs. S stated that her scores
were based on her feelings. Dr. M. then asked her to rate her overall reasons
to stay the same versus her reasons to change based on what she thought about
it. Mrs. S. gave 6 for her resistance score and 8 for her motivation score. This
process helped her understand much better how much her heart ruled her head in
making decisions. Emotionally, she felt that she should stay the same, but rationally
she thought she should protect herself. Assessing
Mrs. S's emotions and values: Looking over her decision balance again,
Dr. M. reflected back to Mrs. S. that she must really love her husband. Mrs. S.
smiled in total agreement and expressed devotion to her husband, stating that
she wanted to care for him when he gets terminally ill. Dr. M. asked her how she
valued her relationship with her husband in comparison to herself and the relationship
to her own family. Mrs. S. loved her husband so much that she was willing to sacrifice
her life for him, but admitted to having mixed feelings when thinking about her
own children from her first marriage. Her adult children did not know about her
current situation. Mrs. S. stated she came from an abusive family and has suffered
from chronic low self-esteem since childhood. |
This
example demonstrates how you can begin to engage patients in dialogue about change
and to develop individualized interventions during a 15-minute appointment. Over
time, effective interventions can assist your patients in deciding whether to
change their values and perceptions in ways that motivate them to take charge
of changing their behavior. The six-step approach described in Section III can
help you learn how to use words, language and dialogue more effectively with your
patients. With repeated practice in using this approach, you could become a more
effective and efficient motivational practitioner. CONTINUING
PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT
A continuing professional
development (CPD) curriculum on motivating health behavior change must revisit
topics at increasing levels of complexity to foster lifelong learning, enrich
professional development and improve clinical performance. Such a dynamic curriculum
could help us develop skills at self-directed learning as well as provide opportunities
for small group learning, individual supervision and/or a longitudinal relationship
with a mentor throughout our formal education and career. Given that such ideal
curricula are rare, however, it is important to take charge of your own CPD. Whatever
your level of clinical experience, you can use this book to prepare for and design
a learning plan for your ongoing professional development. Taking
Charge of Your Professional Development Even if
you were not trained in how to motivate behavior change, you can use self-directed
learning methods, ideally working with patients over time. Section IV in this
book describes how you can develop skills for initiating dialogues with patients
in addressing specific behaviors. If available, workshops can also help you enhance
your motivational skills. Dr. S.'s written evaluation of such a workshop captures
the merits of such training: Although
it has been 15 years since I have done any role-playing, I found it extremely
captivating. Afterward, I found that I was immediately applying in the office
what I had learned in role-playing. I became consciously aware of resistance during
patient interviews and was more apt to closely examine patients' agendas, as well
as their perceptions. Patients appeared extremely gratified. My frustration level
was also considerably diminished. These have been the gifts:
Seeing the therapeutic relationship as a worthy goal in and of itself
Seeing where someone is at along the change continuum and using that to respect
the patient's autonomy and our own humble role as advisers Finding out
what people want and how they see things rather than working with
what I think they want and how I think they see things Being sensitive
to resistance helps me change my approach to patients |
With
training and practice, you can become more effective, deliberate and purposeful
in helping patients work through the change process. At first, this process will
take more time and even slow you down, but in time you will expand your range
and depth of motivational skills. However, you can develop a learning plan for
continuing professional development so that you can monitor your progress, whatever
your starting point or level of clinical experience, on your journey from a novice
to a master. Becoming a master is not a destination but a journey without end.
YOUR SUMMARY
Reflect:
write a note (in 200 words or so) summarizing how this chapter helped you understand
better the potential benefits of exploring your own health behaviors, professional
roles and assumptions, as you learn about how to develop motivation skills. Which
aspects of this premise, if any, evoke some resistance in you? What have you learned
that was new for you? Enhance:
write down your ideas about how your new learning could improve your interactions
with patients. Add your notes to your learning portfolio.
REFERENCES 1.
Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. Transtheoretical therapy: Toward a more integrative
model of change. Psychotherapy Theory, Research and
Practice 1982;19: 276-288 2. Prochaska JO, DiClemente CC. The transtheoretical
approach: Crossing traditional boundaries of therapy. Homewood, IL: Dow
Jones/Irwin; 1984 3. A clinical practice guideline for treating tobacco use
and dependence: A US Public Health Service report. The Tobacco Use and
Dependence Clinical Practice Guideline Panel, Staff, and Consortium Representatives.
Journal of the American Medical Association 2000;283:
3244-3254 4. Law M, Tang JL. An analysis of the effectiveness of interventions
intended to help people stop smoking. Archives of Internal
Medicine 1995;155: 1933-1941 5. Ritvo PG, Irvine MJ, Lindsay EA, et al. A critical
review of research related to family physician-assisted smoking cessation
interventions. Cancer Prevention and Control 1997;1: 289-303 6. Kottke TE,
Battista RN, DeFriese GH, et al. Attributes of successful smoking cessation interventions
in medical practice. A meta-analysis of 39 controlled
trials. Journal of the American Medical Association 1988;259: 2883-2889 7.
Kahan M, Wilson L, Becker L. Effectiveness of physician-based interventions with
problem drinkers: A review. Canadian Medical Association
Journal 1995;152: 851-859 8. Brunner E, White I, Thorogood M, et al. Can dietary
interventions change diet and cardiovascular risk factors? A meta- analysis
of randomized controlled trials [see comments]. American Journal of Public Health
1997;87: 1415-1422 9. Ashenden R, Silagy C, Weller D. A systematic review of
the effectiveness of promoting lifestyle change in general practice.
[Review] [51 refs]. Family Practice 1997;14: 160-176 10. Ebrahim S, Smith GD.
Systematic review of randomized controlled trials of multiple risk factor interventions
for preventing coronary heart disease.
British Medical Journal 1997;314: 1666-1674 11. Velicer W, Fava J, and Prochaska
J. Distribution of smokers by stage. Cancer Prevention Research Center, 1-26.
1995 12. Velicer WF, DiClemente CC. Understanding and intervening with the
total population of smokers. Tobacco Control 1993;2:
95-96 13. Kaplan RM, Pierce JP, Gilpin EA, et al. Stages of smoking cessation:
The 1990 California Tobacco Survey. Tobacco Control
1993;2: 139-144 14. Burns D, Pierce JP. Tobacco use in California 1990-1991.
Sacramento: California Department of Health Services; 1992 15. Butler CC, Pill
R, Stott NCH. Qualitative study of patients' perceptions of doctors' advice to
quit smoking: Implications for opportunistic
health promotion. British Medical Journal 1998;316: 1878-1881 16. Bowman MA,
Dignan M, Crandall S, et al. Changes in functional status related to health maintenance
visits to family physicians [see comments].
Journal of Family Practice 2000;49: 428-433 17. Balint M. The doctor, his patient,
and the illness. New York: International Universities Press; 1977 18. Simons-Mortin
DG, Mullen PD, Mains DA, et al. Characteristics of controlled studies of patient
education and counseling for preventive
health behaviors. Patient Education and Counseling 1992;19: 175-204 19. Fiore
MC. Treating tobacco use and dependence: An introduction to the U.S. Public Health
Service Clinical Practice Guideline. Respiratory
Care 2000;45: 1196-1199 20. Silagy C, Ketteridge S. The effectiveness of physician
advice to aid smoking cessation. In: Lancaster T, Silagy C, eds. Tobacco
addiction module of the Cochrane database of systematic reviews [updated 2 December
1996]. Oxford; 1996 21. West R, McNeill A, Raw M. Smoking cessation guidelines
for health professionals: An update. Health Education Authority.
Thorax 2000;55: 987-999 22. Coleman T, Murphy E, Cheater F. Factors influencing
discussion of smoking between general practitioners and patients who
smoke: a qualitative study. British Journal of General Practice 2000;50: 207-210 23.
Coulter A, Schofield T. Prevention in general practice: The views of doctors in
the Oxford region. British Journal of General
Practice 1991;41: 140-143 24. Coleman T, Wilson A. Anti-smoking advice in general
practice consultations: General practitioners' attitudes, reported practice
and perceived problems. British Journal of General Practice 1996;46: 87-91 25.
Tapper-Jones L, Smail S, Pill R, et al. Doctors' attitudes towards patient education
in the primary care consultation. Health
Education Journal 1990;49: 47-50 26. Stott NC, Pill RM. "Advise yes, dictate
no": Patients' views on health promotion in the consultation. Family Practice
1990;7: 125-131 27. Kviz FJ, Clark
MA, Hope H, et al. Patients' perceptions of their physician's role in smoking
cessation by age and readiness to stop
smoking. Preventive Medicine 1997;26: 340-349 28. Coleman T, Wilson A. Anti-smoking
advice from general practitioners: Is a population-based approach to advice-giving
feasible? British Journal of General Practice
2000;50: 1001-1004 29. Lakoff G, Johnson M. Metaphors we live by. Chicago:
University of Chicago Press; 1980 30. Royston G, Dick P. Healthcare ecology.
British Journal of Health Care Management 1998;4: 238-241 31. Dick P. The NHS
as an ecosystem. British Journal of General Practice 2001;51: 248-249 32. Boudon
R. The limitations of rational choice theory. American Journal of Sociology 1998;104:
817-828 33. Goldman L. Enlightened individual choice vs the public's health:
Rational prevention from whose perspective? Journal of General
Internal Medicine 1995;10: 147-150 34. Somekh B, Thaler M. Contradictions of
management theory, organizational cultures and the self. Education Action Research
1997;5: 141-160 35. Stewart M, Brown JB, Weston WW. Patient-centered medicine.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications; 1995 36. Stewart M, Brown JB, Donner
A, et al. The impact of patient-centered care on outcomes. Journal of Family Practice
2000;49: 796-804 37. Botelho RJ, Novak
SJ. Dealing with substance misuse, abuse, and dependency. Primary Care 1993;20(1):
51-70 38. Botelho RJ, Skinner HA. Motivating change in health behavior: Implications
for health promotion and disease prevention.
Primary Care (Saunders) 1995;22: 565-589 39. Botelho RJ, Skinner HA, Williams
GC, et al. Patients with alcohol problems in primary care: Understanding their
resistance and motivating change. In:
Stuart MR, Lieberman IJA, eds. Primary care: Clinics in office practice. Philadelphia:
W.B. Saunders Company; 1999:279-298 40. Harackiewicz JM, Sansone C, Blair LW,
et al. Attributional processes in behavior change and maintenance: Smoking cessation
and continued abstinence. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 1987;55:
372-378 41. Ockene JK, Kristeller J, Goldberg R, et al. Increasing the efficacy
of physician-delivered smoking interventions: A randomized
clinical trial [see comments]. Journal of General Internal Medicine 1991;6: 1-8 42.
Currie CE, Amos A, Hunt SM. The dynamics and processes of behavioral change in
five classes of health-related behavior-findings
from qualitative research. Health Education Research 1991;6: 443-453 43. Ryan
RM, Plant RW, O'Malley S. Initial motivations for alcohol treatment: Relations
with patient characteristics, treatment
involvement, and dropout. Addictive Behaviors 1995;20: 279-297 44. Williams
GC, Grow VM, Freedman ZR, et al. Motivational predictors of weight loss and weight-loss
maintenance. Journal of Personality and
Social Psychology 1996;70(1): 115-126 45. Williams GC, Rodin GC, Ryan RM, et
al. Autonomous regulation and long-term medication adherence in adult outpatients.
Health Psychology 1998;17: 269-276 46. Perz CA, DiClemente CC, Carbonari JP.
Doing the right thing at the right time? The interaction of stages and processes
of change in successful smoking cessation.
Health Psychology 1996;15: 462-468 47. Patrick K, Sallis J, Long B, et al.
A new tool for encouraging activity: The physician and sports medicine 1994;22 48.
Calfas KJ, Long BJ, Sallis JF, et al. A controlled trial of physician counseling
to promote the adoption of physical activity.
Preventive Medicine 1996;25: 225-233 49. Long BJ, Calfas KJ, Wooten W, et al.
A multisite field test of the acceptability of physical activity counseling in
primary care: project PACE. American Journal
of Preventive Medicine 1996;12: 73-81 50. Sutton S. Can "stage of change"
provide guidance in the treatment of addictions? A critical examination of Prochaska
and DiClemente's model. In: Edwards G,
Dare C, eds. Psychotherapy, psychological treatments and the addictions. New
York: Cambridge University Press; 1996 51. Farkas AJ, Pierce JP, Gilpin EA,
et al. Is stage-of-change a useful measure of the likelihood of smoking cessation?
Annals of Behavioral Medicine 1996;18:
79-86 52. Prochaska JO, Velicer WF. On models, methods and premature conclusions.
Addiction 1996;91: 1281-1283 53. Farkas AJ, Pierce JP, Zhu SH, et al. Addiction
versus stages of change models in predicting smoking cessation. Addiction 1996;91:
1271-1280 54. Joseph J, Breslin C, Skinner HA. Critical perspective on the
transtheoretical model and the stages of change. In: Tucher J, Donovan
D, Marlatt A, eds. Changing addictive behavior: Moving beyond therapy assisted
change. New York: Guilford Press; 1999:160-190 55.
Bien TH, Miller WR, Tonigan JS. Brief interventions for alcohol problems: A review.
Addiction 1993;88: 315-335 56. Ershoff DH, Quinn V, Boyd NR, et al. The Kaiser
Permanente prenatal smoking-cessation trial: When more isn't better, what
is enough? American Journal of Preventive Medicine 1999;17: 161-168 57. Miller
WR, Sovereign RG, Krege B. Motivational interviewing with problem drinkers: II.
The drinker's check-up as a preventative
intervention. Behavioral Psychotherapy 1988;16: 251-268 58. Stephens RS, Roffman
RA, Simpson EE. Treating adult marijuana dependence: A test of the relapse prevention
model. Journal of Consulting and Clinical
Psychology 1994;62: 92-99 59. Baer JS, Marlatt GA. Maintenance of smoking cessation
[published erratum appears in Clinical Chest Medicine 1992 Mar;13(1):ix].
Clinical Chest Medicine 1991;12: 793-800 60. Smith DE, Heckmeyer CM, Kratt
PP, et al. Motivational interviewing to improve adherence to a behavioral weight-control
program for older obese women with NIDDM. Diabetes Care 1997;20: 52-54 61.
Brown JM, Miller WR. Impact of motivational interviewing on participation in residential
alcoholism treatment. Psychology of Addictive
Behaviors 1993;7: 211-218 62. Allsop S, Saunders B, Phillips M, et al. A trial
of relapse prevention with severely dependent male problem drinkers. Addiction
1997;92: 61-73 63. Project MATCH Research Group. Matching alcoholism treatments
to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH posttreatment
drinking outcomes. Journal of Studies on Alcohol 1997;58: 7-29 64. May WW.
Findings from Project MATCH: Fact or artifact? Behavioral Health Management 1998; January/February:
38-39 65. Matching alcoholism treatments to client heterogeneity: Project MATCH
three-year drinking outcomes. Alcoholism, Clinical
and Experimental Research 1998;22: 1300-1311 66. Saunders B, Wilkinson C, Phillips
M. The impact of a brief motivational intervention with opiate users attending
a methadone programme. Addiction 1995;90:
415-424 67. Heather N, Rollnick S, Bell A, et al. Effects of brief counseling
among male heavy drinkers identified on general hospital wards.
Drug and Alcohol Review 1996;15: 29-38 68. Woollard J, Beilin L, Lord T, et
al. A controlled trial of nurse counseling on lifestyle change for hypertensives
treated in general practice: Preliminary
results. Clinical and Experimental Pharmacology and Physiology 1995;22: 466-468 69.
Butler CC, Rollnick S, Cohen DA, et al. Motivational consulting versus brief advice
for smokers in general practice: A randomized
trial. British Journal of General Practice 1999;49: 611-616 70. Berg-Smith
SM, Stevens VJ, Brown KM, et al. A brief motivational intervention to improve
dietary adherence in adolescents. The
Dietary Intervention Study in Children (DISC) Research Group. Health Education
Research 1999;14: 399-410 71. Lowman
C, Allen J, Stout RL. Replication and extension of Marlatt's taxonomy of relapse
precipitants: Overview of procedures and
results. The Relapse Research Group. Addiction 1996;91: S51-S71 72. Carroll
K. Relapse prevention as a psychosocial treatment: A review of controlled clinical
trials. Experimental and Clinical Psychopharmacology
1996;4: 46-54 73. Botelho RJ. Negotiating partnerships in healthcare: Contexts
and methods. In: Suchman AL, Botelho RJ, Hinton-Walker
P, eds. Partnerships in healthcare: Transforming relational process. Rochester,
NY: University of Rochester Press; 1998:19-49 74.
Bartlett's Familiar Quotations. 14th, rev. and enl. ed. Boston: Little, Brown
and Co.; 1968 75. Miller WR, Rollnick S. Motivational interviewing: Preparing
people to change addictive behavior. New York: Guilford Press;
1991 76. Rollnick S, Mason P, Butler C. Health behavior change: A guide for
practitioners. Edinburgh, Scotland: Churchill Livingstone;
1999 77. McGinnis JM, Foege WH. Actual causes of death in the United States.
Journal of the American Medical Association 1993;270:
2207-2212 78. Rogers CR. A way of being. Boston: Houghton Mifflin; 1980 79.
Freire P. Education for critical consciousness. New York: Seabury Press; 1973 80.
Wallerstein N, Bernstein E. Empowerment education: Freire's ideas adapted to health
education. Health Education Quarterly
1988;15: 379-394 81. Brehm JW. A theory of psychological reactance. New York:
Academic Press; 1966 82. Brehm SS, Brehm JW. Psychological reactance: A theory
of freedom and control. New York: Academic Press; 1981 83. Shapiro DH, Jr.,
Schwartz CE, Astin JA. Controlling ourselves, controlling our world. American
Psychologist 1996;51: 1213-1230 84.
Deci EL, Ryan RM. Intrinsic motivation and self-determination in human behavior.
New York: Plenum Press; 1985 85. Williams GC, Deci EL, Ryan RM. Building healthcare
partnerships by supporting autonomy: Promoting maintained behavior
change and positive healthcare outcomes. In: Suchman AL, Botelho RJ, Hinton-Walker
P, eds. Partnerships in healthcare: Transforming
relational process. Rochester, NY: University of Rochester Press; 1998:67-87 86.
Lewis CE, Clancy C, Leake B, et al. The counseling practices of internists. Annals
of Internal Medicine 1991;114: 54-58 87. Wells KB, Lewis CE, Leake B, et al.
Do physicians preach what they practice? A study of physicians' health habits
and counseling practices. Journal of the
American Medical Association 1984;252: 2846-2848 88. Schwartz JS, Lewis CE,
Clancy C, et al. Internists' practices in health promotion and disease prevention.
A survey [see comments]. Annals of Internal
Medicine 1991;114: 46-53 89. Frank E, Rothenberg R, Lewis C, et al. Correlates
of physicians' prevention-related practices. Findings from the Women Physicians'
Health Study. Archives of Family Medicine 2000;9: 359-367 90. Frank E, Breyan
J, Elon L. Physician disclosure of healthy personal behaviors improves credibility
and ability to motivate. Archives of Family
Medicine 2000;9: 287-290 91. Lewin K. Field theory in social science. New York:
Harper Torchbooks; 1951 92. Botelho RJ. Motivate healthy habits: Stepping stones
to lasting change. Rochester, NY; 2004 93. Bateson G. Mind and nature: A necessary
unity. New York: E.P. Dutton; 1979 94. Botelho RJ. A negotiation model for
the doctor-patient relationship. Family Practice 1992;9: 210-21 |
 |