Cited by 44Substance Abuse Treatment and OutcomesBehavioral Health and InterventionsAlcohol Consumption and Health Effects

Motivational interviewing with hazardous drinkers

Beckham, Nancy·2007·Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners

Abstract

PURPOSES: To test the effectiveness of motivational interviewing in a population of hazardous drinkers utilizing community health care centers in rural southeastern Idaho. DATA SOURCES: This study targeted rural people at risk for alcohol dependence utilizing low-income community health care centers in rural southeastern Idaho. The Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) was used to screen interested clients' alcohol use. Clients achieving an AUDIT score indicating hazardous alcohol use were recruited into the study and randomized into a control or treatment group. Twenty-six hazardous drinkers attending five low-income community health centers participated in the study. The experimental group participated in one motivational interviewing session with the investigator, a family nurse practitioner (NP). The comparison group received no treatment. Alcohol use was tracked for 6 weeks after successful recruitment into the program. CONCLUSIONS: Participants in the study significantly decreased their average number of drinks per day. At time 1 (pretreatment), the control group drank 4.37 drinks per day and the treatment group drank 4.65 drinks per day. At time 2 (posttest), the control group drank 3.77 drinks per day and the treatment group drank 1.95 drinks per day. The effects of the motivational interviewing treatment on hazardous drinking also were measured by serum gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT), a liver function test. There was also a significant decrease in the GGT from pretest to posttest in the treatment group. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The results of this investigation found that motivational interviewing shows promise as an effective intervention for hazardous drinkers attending low-income community clinics. Although other possible explanations could be postulated for the positive changes in sample participants, the data indicate that the motivational interviewing approach was responsible for a significant portion of the positive changes within the current sample. The information collected from the study adds to the literature on hazardous drinking, research, and treatment of this significant problem. Negotiating change in behavior is part of the practice of NPs. People struggling with alcohol use are more likely to encounter NPs, family doctors, or social workers than counselors specializing in alcohol treatment. Motivational interviewing is specifically designed for preparing people for change. Because most people resist being told what to do, that is, "you have to stop drinking," use of motivational interviewing principles can decrease resistance and optimize change. Additionally, identifying and intervening with hazardous drinking in a primary care setting can reduce healthcare costs and reduce the stigma of specialist care. Adding this valuable communication skill to the competencies of NPs is important to both clients and NPs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1745-7599.2006.00200.x

Cites

69 of 69 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?

  • Efficacy/effectiveness scores ranged from 4.5 to 12.

    “Efficacy/effectiveness scores ranged from 4.5 (Beckham 2007;Fleming 2004;Romelsjö 1989) to 12 (Lock 2006).”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Beckham 2007

  • Seven studies compared brief intervention to no or minimal intervention and reported gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT).

    “We included seven studies that compared brief intervention to no or minimal intervention and reported gamma-glutamyltransferase (GGT) (Aalto 2000;Beckham 2007;Noknoy 2010;Romelsjö 1989;Scott 1990;Tomson 1998;Wallace 1988).”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Beckham 2007

  • 22 studies could not be included in meta-analyses, either because outcomes were not reported at 12 months, or outcome measures differed from those prespecified for this review (such as AUDIT score).

    “We could not include 22 studies in metaanalyses (Aalto 2000;Bazargan-Hejazi 2005;Beckham 2007;Crawford 2010;D'Amico 2008;Dent 2008;Désy 2010;Díez 2002;Drummond 2009;Heather 1987;Kunz 2004;L'Engle 2014;Lane 2008;McDevitt-Murphy 2014;Mello 2008;Mertens 2014;Noknoy 2010;Rodríguez 2003;Segatto 2011;Sommers 2006;Tait 2004;Woolard 2013), either because outcomes were not reported at 12 months, or outcome”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Beckham 2007

  • In five studies, losses to follow-up were not reported according to study arm.

    “Losses to follow-up were not reported according to study arm in five studies (Beckham 2007;Helstrom 2014;Israel 1996;Longabaugh 2001;McIntosh 1997).”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Beckham 2007

  • Beckham 2007 had high risk of bias for blinding of treatment providers.

    “Blinding of treatment providers High risk Not blinded; no reported attempt to reduce bias.”

    From Effectiveness of brief alcohol interventions in primary care populations (2018) · cites this paper as Beckham 2007

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Beckham, N.
Affiliations
Gonzaga University (US)
Corresponding author
Beckham, Nancy
Venue
Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2007-02
Volume
19
Issue
2
Pages
103-110
ISSN
  • 1041-2972 (ISSN-L)
  • 1745-7599
OpenAlex
W2088585832
Cited by
44
References
69
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 3 · 2014: 2 · 2013: 3 · 2012: 3
FWCI
2.98
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Epidemiology › Substance Abuse Treatment and Outcomes
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Applied Psychology › Behavioral Health and Interventions
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Pathology and Forensic Medicine › Alcohol Consumption and Health Effects
Keywords
motivational interviewing, hazardous drinking, alcohol consumption reduction, family nurse practitioners, rural population, alcohol dependence risk, gamma-glutamyl transferase, alcohol screening, primary care intervention
MeSH terms
Alcohol Drinking, Alcoholism, Community Health Centers, Female, Humans, Idaho, Interview, Psychological, Male, Motivation, Nurse Practitioners, Nurse-Patient Relations, Rural Health, Nurse's Role, Risk Reduction Behavior

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