4.2 Article

Preparing clients for cognitive behavioral therapy: A randomized pilot study of motivational interviewing for anxiety

Journal

COGNITIVE THERAPY AND RESEARCH
Volume 30, Issue 4, Pages 481-498

Publisher

SPRINGER/PLENUM PUBLISHERS
DOI: 10.1007/s10608-006-9016-y

Keywords

motivational interviewing; motivation; preparation for therapy; pretreatment; anxiety

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Although CBT is a well-supported treatment for anxiety, recovery rates and compliance with treatment procedures are less than optimal. Using adjunctive brief preparatory interventions may help bolster response rates and engagement with therapy procedures. Motivational Interviewing (MI: Miller, W. R., & Rollnick, S. (1991, 2002). Motivational interviewing: preparing people to change addictive behavior. New York: Guilford) is a client-centered, directive method for enhancing motivation for change and has been demonstrated to be a valuable treatment prelude in the addictions domain. Prior to group cognitive behavioral therapy, 55 individuals with a principal anxiety diagnosis (45% panic disorder, 31% social phobia, and 24% generalized anxiety disorder) were randomly assigned to receive either three sessions of MI adapted for anxiety or no pretreatment (NPT). The MI pretreatment group, compared to NPT, showed significantly higher expectancy for anxiety control and greater homework compliance in CBT. Although both groups demonstrated clinically significant anxiety symptom improvements, the MI pretreatment group had a significantly higher number of CBT responders compared to NPT. At 6-month follow-up, both groups evidenced maintenance of gains. These results provide suggestive evidence that brief pretreatments, such as MI, may enhance engagement with and outcome from CBT. The promising results also justify the future investigation of these effects using more powerful designs which may discern whether the effects are specific to MI or to some type of pretreatment.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available