Cited by 29Behavioral Health and InterventionsHealth Policy Implementation ScienceInnovations in Medical Education

Evaluation of a training programme for primary care providers to offer brief behaviour change counselling on risk factors for non-communicable diseases in South Africa

Malan, Zelra, Mash, Bob, Everett-Murphy, Katherine·2016·Patient Education and Counseling

Abstract

Objective To evaluate the effect on clinical practice of training primary care providers (PCPs) in an approach to brief behaviour change counselling (BBCC), integrating the 5As (ask, alert, assess, assist, arrange) with a guiding style derived from motivational interviewing in the South African context. BBCC was focused on the four risky behaviours (unhealthy eating, tobacco smoking, physical inactivity, harmful alcohol use) for non-communicable diseases.Methods It was a before-and-after design, recording BBCC skills at baseline, directly after training and 6-weeks later. We evaluated each recording for adherence to the guiding style and delivery of the 5As using the Motivational Interviewing Treatment Integrity 3.1.1. tool, and a tool based on the 5As training design.Results 123 recordings were collected from 41 PCPs. Results showed a significant improvement in adoption of the guiding style (e.g. global score at baseline 2.0 (2.0-2.6) and in clinical practice 3.0 (2.7-3.3) p<0.001) and completion of the 5A steps (e.g. assist score at baseline 1.26 (1.12-1.4) and in clinical practice 1.75 (1.61-1.89) p<0.001).Conclusion Training PCPs in this approach to BBCC is effective at changing their clinical practice in the short term.Practice implications The training programme should be integrated into the curricula of PCPs, and used in continuing professional development.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.pec.2015.08.008

Cites

37 of 37 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Malan, Z., Mash, B., & Everett-Murphy, K.
Affiliations
Stellenbosch University (ZA)
Corresponding author
Malan, Zelra
Venue
Patient Education and Counseling
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016-01
Volume
99
Issue
1
Pages
125-131
ISSN
0738-3991 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W1445776980
Cited by
29
References
37
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 1 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 1 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 2
FWCI
4.28
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Patient Education and Counseling (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
CDIA (Chronic Disease Initiative for Africa)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
Keywords
primary care providers, motivational interviewing, non-communicable diseases, risk-taking, unhealthy diet, smoking, physical inactivity, hazardous drinking, provider training, clinical practice change, implementation fidelity, continuing professional development
MeSH terms
Clinical Competence, Education, Medical, Continuing, Health Promotion, Humans, Primary Health Care, South Africa, Program Evaluation, Health Behavior, Directive Counseling, Motivational Interviewing

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review