1	Motivational Interviewing: Findings from Clinical Trials Updated: 10 December 2004
2	Alcohol
3	Allsop et al., 1997 Addiction, 92:61-74 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Alcohol abuse Nation Scotland N 60 adult outpatients MI 8 session group MI + skills Comparison Group discussion TAU Follow-up 6 months
4	Allsop et al., 1997
5	Baer et al., 1992 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 60:924-979 Design Randomized clinical trial Population College Students Nation US (Seattle, WA)) N 134 young adults MI 1 session (60 min) Comparison Two groups: (1) six weekly cognitive behavioral groups (90 minute ea) (2) a six-unit self-help cognitive behavioral manual Follow-up post-treatment (6 weeks), short-term maintenance (3 & 6 months), long-term maintenance (12 & 24 months)
6	Baer et al., 1992 Comparative analyses exclude the self-help manual group because of poor program completion and high drop-out in this group Overall reduction on the three dependent variables were statistically significant at the three follow-up points. Although CB group subjects reported slightly lower numbers on all three drinking measures over time, differences between MI and CB subjects were not statistically significant. Significant interactive effects were noted for age, with increases in drinking during the year subjects reached legal drinking status.
7	Baer et al., 1992
8	Baer et al., 1992
9	Baer et al., 1992
10	Baer et al., 1992
11	Bien et al., 1993 Behavioural & Cognitive Psychotherapy, 21:347-356 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Outpatient alcohol (VA) Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 32 adults MI 1 session MET (+ TAU) Comparison TAU Follow-up 6 months post discharge
12	Bien et al., 1993
13	Bien et al., 1993
14	Borsari & Carey, 2000 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 68:728-733 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Binge drinkers Nation US (Syracuse, NY) N 60 college students MI 1 session MET Comparison Assessment only Follow-up 6 weeks
15	Borsari & Carey, 2000
16	Brown & Miller, 1993 Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 7:211-218 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Inpatient alcohol Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 28 adults MI 1 session MET (+ TAU) Comparison TAU Follow-up 3 months post discharge
17	Brown & Miller, 1993
18	Brown & Miller, 1993
19	Dench & Bennett, 2000 Behavioural & Cognitive Psychotherapy, 28:121-130 Design Randomized clinical trial Population 6 week day treatment program Nation United Kingdom N 51 alcohol dependent patients MI 1 session Comparison Attention placebo education Follow-up 1 and 6 weeks
20	Dench & Bennett, 2000
21	Handmaker et al., 1999 Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 60:285-287 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Prenatal care clinics Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 42 pregnant drinkers MI 1-hour individual session Comparison Risk-alert letter Follow-up 2 months
22	Handmaker et al., 1999
23	Heather et al., 1996 Drug & Alcohol Review, 15:29-38 Design Block assignment Population General hospital inpatients Nation Australia N 174 adult heavy drinkers MI 1 30-40 minute session Comparison Skills training or TAU Follow-up 6 months
24	Heather et al., 1996
25	Kuchipudi et al., 1990 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 65:531-541 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Acute gastrointestinal ward Nation US (Hines, IL) N 114 alcohol-related admissions MI 5 sessions with 5 practitioners Comparison TAU Follow-up 16 weeks
26	Kuchipudi et al., 1990
27	Kuchipudi et al., 1990 Was it Motivational Interviewing? Each patient talked to by five different clinicians Complete staff turnover 3 times in 5 months “Emphasized the need for and benefits of alcoholism therapy” “Two prolonged sessions on available treatment programs” “The person’s health and drinking were reviewed from the viewpoint and with the authority of the director of the unit”
28	Marlatt et al., 1998 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 66:604-615 Design Randomized clinical trial Population College students Nation US (Seattle, WA) N 348 heavy drinkers MI 1 individual session Comparison Assessment only Follow-up 2 years
29	Marlatt et al., 1998
30	Miller et al., 1988 Behavioural Psychotherapy, 16:251-268 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Self-referred problem drinkers Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 42 adults MI Assessment + 1 MET session Comparison Confrontational counseling Waiting list (6 weeks) Follow-up 18 months
31	Miller et al., 1988
32	Miller et al., 1993 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 61:455-461 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Self-referred problem drinkers Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 42 problem drinkers MI Assessment + 1 MET session Comparison Confrontational counseling Waiting list (6 weeks) Follow-up 12 months
33	Miller et al., 1993
34	Miller et al., 1993
35	Miller et al., 1993
36	Miller et al., 1993
37	Monti et al., 1999 Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 67:989-994 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Emergency room Nation US (Providence, RI) N 94 adolescents (18-19) MI 1 session (35-40 min) Comparison Standard care Follow-up 6 months
38	Monti et al., 1999
39	Murphy et al., 2001 Psychology of Addictive Behaviors, 15:373-379 Design Randomized clinical trial Population College Students Nation US (Auburn, AL) N 99 drinkers MI 1 session (50 min) Comparison Alcohol education; No intervention Follow-up 9 months
40	Murphy et al., 2001
41	Project MATCH, 1997 Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 58:7-29 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Outpatient and aftercare Nation US (9 sites) N 1,726 adults MI 4 session MET Comparison 12 session CBT or TSF Follow-up 15 months post-treatment
42	Project MATCH, 1997
43	Project MATCH, 1998 Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research, 22:1300-1311
44	Sellman et al., 2001 Journal of Studies on Alcohol, 62:389-396 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Mild/moderate dependence Nation New Zealand N 125 alcohol outpatients MI MET 4 sessions Comparison Nondirective reflective listening Control: No further counseling Follow-up 6 months post-treatment
45	Sellman et al., 2001
46	Senft et al., 1997 American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 13:464-470 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Primary care Nation US (Portland, OR) N 516 adults MI 1 session, 15 min (+ TAU) Comparison TAU Follow-up 12 months
47	Senft et al., 1997
48	Senft et al., 1997
49	Smith et al., 2003 Addiction, 98:43-52 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Oral and maxillofacial surgery clinic out-patients Nation UK (Cardiff, Wales) N 151 young males with alcohol- related facial injuries MI 1 manual-guided session (+ TAU) Comparison TAU Follow-up 3 months and one year
50	Smith et al., 2003
51	Smith et al., 2003
52	Smith et al., 2003
53	Cardiovascular Health
54	Scales, 1998 Doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico Design Randomized clinical trial Population Cardiovascular rehab Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 61 MI TAU + MET (1 hr) + skills based health ed (90 min) Comparison TAU traditional rehab Follow-up 12 weeks
55	Scales, 1998 Significantly greater decrease in MI group, compared with TAU, in linear combination of three risk scores Perceived stress Physical activity Dietary fat All three contributed to the significant difference, but only stress was significant in a univariate test
56	Scales, 1998
57	Woollard et al., 1995 Clinical & Experimental Pharmacology & Physiology, 22:466-468 Design Randomized clinical trial Population General practice Nation Australia (Perth, WA) N 166 patients with hypertension MI High: 6 nurse sessions (45 min) Low: 1 session + 5 phone (15 min) Comparison TAU Follow-up 18 weeks
58	Woollard et al., 1995
59	Woollard et al., 1995
60	Diabetes
61	Smith et al., 1997 Diabetes Care, 20:52-54 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Recruited by newspaper Nation US (Birmingham, AL) N 22 older obese women MI 3 sessions MI + TAU Comparison TAU (behavior therapy) Follow-up Post-treatment
62	Smith et al., 1997
63	Smith et al., 1997
64	Drug Abuse
65	Aubrey, 1998 Doctoral dissertation, University of New Mexico Design Randomized clinical trial Population Adolescent drug abuse treatment Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 77 adolescents entering treatment MI 1 individual session + TAU Comparison TAU Follow-up 3 months
66	Aubrey, 1998
67	Aubrey, 1998
68	Aubrey, 1998
69	Aubrey, 1998
70	Aubrey, 1998
71	Baker et al., 2001 Addiction, 96:1279-1287 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Regular amphetamine users Nation Australia N 64 adults MI 2 individual sessions + book 4 session MI + skill training Comparison Self-help book Follow-up 6 months
72	Baker et al., 2001
73	Baker et al., 2002 Addiction, 97:1329-1337 Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 105:xx Design Randomized clinical trial Population Inpatient psychiatric hospital Nation Australia N 160 adults with concomitant disorders MI 30-45 minute individual session Comparison Self-help book and brief advice Follow-up 12 months
74	Baker et al., 2002
75	Baker et al., 2002
76	Lincourt et al., in press Addictive Behavior Design Quasi-experiment (attendance) Population Mandated outpatient treatment Nation US (New York) N 167 adults (substance abuse) MI 6 session group + TAU Comparison TAU Follow-up End of treatment
77	Lincourt et al., in press
78	Longshore et al., 1999 Substance Use & Misuse, 34:1223-1241 Design Quasi-experiment (attendance) Population Mandated outpatient treatment Nation US (Los Angeles, CA) N 222 African-American drug users MI 1 session Comparison Needs assessment Follow-up End of treatment
79	Longshore et al., 1999 MI group rated (non-blind) significantly higher: Treatment involvement (self-report; p<.04) Motivation for change (self-report; p<.05) Treatment participation (clinician rating; p<.0001) Self-disclosure (clinician rating; p<.0001) Preparation for change (clinician rating; p<.0003)
80	Marijuana Treatment Project Research Group (2004) Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 72:455-466 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Inpatient or outpatient treatment Nation US (3 sites) N 450 adult marijuana smokers MI 2 session MET Comparison 9-session MET + behavior therapy Control 4-month waiting list control Follow-up 15 months
81	Marijuana Treatment Project Research Group (2004)
82	Marijuana Treatment Project Research Group (2004) Marijuana Joints per Week
83	Miller, Yahne & Tonigan (2003) Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 71:754-763 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Inpatient or outpatient treatment Nation US (Albuquerque, NM) N 208 drug dependent adults MI 1 session + TAU Comparison TAU only Follow-up 12 months
84	Miller et al. (2003) Percent Days Abstinent from Alcohol/Drugs
85	Saunders et al., 1995 Addiction, 90:415-424 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Methadone maintenance clinic Nation Australia (Perth, WA) N 122 adults MI 1 session (1 hour) Comparison Educational control Follow-up 6 months
86	Saunders et al., 1995
87	Saunders et al., 1995 MI vs. Educational Control Group The MI group showed greater: Immediate (1 week) advance to contemplation stage (p<.03) Positive view of abstinence at 3 months(p<.05) Reduction in drug-related problems at 6 months (p<.04) Time to relapse to heroin use (p<.05)
88	Schneider et al., 2000 Journal of Behavioral Health Services and Research, 27:60-74 Design Quasi-experimental Population Employee assistance programs Nation US (Boston, MA) N 89 clients with substance abuse MI 2 session MET Comparison 2 session confrontation/feedback Follow-up 3 and 9 months
89	Schneider et al., 2000
90	Schneider et al., 2000
91	Stein et al., 2002 Addiction, 97:691-700 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Needle exchange program recipients Nation US (Providence, RI) N 187 active injection drug users MI 2 sessions (60 min each) - one month apart Comparison Assessment only Follow-up 1 and 6 months
92	Stein et al., 2002 MI subjects (based on observed percentage differences and odds ratios) were more likely than controls to be abstinent at 6 months. MI subjects reported lower mean heroin use frequency than controls at 6 months. MI subjects’ 37.5% reduction in drinking days is larger than that of most brief alcohol intervention trials. MI subjects with above median (>9) baseline drinking day frequency were over two times more likely than controls to report reductions of 7 or more days (p<.05) at 6 months.
93	Stein et al., 2002
94	Stephens et al., 2000 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 68:898-908 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Recruited by newspaper Nation US (Seattle, WA) N 291 marijuana users MI 2 sessions MET (90 min) Comparison 14 sessions group behavior therapy (2 hours) Waiting list (4 months) Follow-up 16 months
95	Stephens et al., 2000
96	Stephens et al., 2000
97	Stephens et al., 2000
98	Stephens et al., 2000
99	Stotts et al., 2001 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 69:858-862 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Outpatient cocaine detoxification Nation US (Houston, TX) N 105 cocaine dependent MI 2 sessions MET (1 hour) Comparison Detoxification only Follow-up 12 weeks post-detox
100	Stotts et al., 2001
101	Stotts et al., 2001
102	Dual Diagnosis
103	Barrowclough et al, 2001 American Journal of Psychiatry, 158:1706-1713 Design Randomized trial Population Schizophrenia or schizoaffective + substance use disorder Nation US N 36 adults (marijuana) MI 5 sessions + 24 CBT sessions Comparison 24 CBT sessions Follow-up 1 year
104	Barrowclough et al., 1998
105	Daley et al, 1998 American Journal of Psychiatry, 155:1611-1613 Design Consecutive assignment Population Discharge from treatment Nation US (Pittsburgh, PA) N 23 adults (cocaine+depression) MI 5 individual + 4 group sessions Comparison TAU Follow-up 1 year
106	Daley et al., 1998
107	Daley & Zuckoff, 1998 Social Work, 43:470-473 Design Consecutive cohorts Population Dual diagnosis inpatients Nation US (Pittsburgh, PA) N “Nearly 100” MI 1 pre-discharge session Comparison TAU (no MI) Follow-up Proximal
108	Daley & Zuckoff, 1998
109	Martino et al., 2000 American Journal on Addictions, 9:88-91 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Partial hospital program Nation US (New Haven, CT) N 23 dual diagnosis patients MI 1 session (45-60 min) Comparison TAU Follow-up End of treatment (12 wk)
110	Martino et al., 2000
111	Eating Disorders
112	Treasure et al., 1999 Behaviour Research & Therapy, 37:405-418 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Bulimia Nation UK (London, Maudsley) N 125 outpatients MI 4 session MET Comparison 4 session behavior therapy Follow-up 4 weeks
113	Treasure et al., 1999 No significant differences between MI and behavior therapy at 4 weeks on: Drop-out rate Binge eating Vomiting Laxative abuse
114	Gambling
115	Hodgins et al., 2001 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 69:50-57 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Problem gambling Nation Canada (Calgary, Alberta) N 102 adults MI 1 phone session (20-45 min) Comparison Mailed self-help book Waiting list control Follow-up 12 months
116	Hodgins et al., 2001
117	Health Promotion
118	Resnicow et al, 2001 American Journal of Public Health, 91, 1686-1693. Design Randomized Clinical Trial Population Adults recruited through Black Churches Nation US (Atlanta, GA) N 861 adults MI 3 telephone contacts by trained dietitians Comparison 1) Health Education only, 2) Self-help materials plus one non-MI phone call Main Outcome Self-reported fruit & vegetable intake (F &V) Follow-up 1 year
119	Resnicow et al, 2001
120	Thevos et al, 2000 Health Promotion International, 15:207-214 Design Comparison zones Population Households Nation Zambia, Africa N 332 households MI Health visitor consults Comparison Health education Follow-up 6 months
121	Thevos et al., 2000
122	HIV Risk
123	Carey et al., 1997 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 65:531-541 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Women at risk for HIV Nation US (Syracuse, NY) N 102 women from community MI 4 group MET sessions Comparison Attention placebo group Follow-up 3 months
124	Carey et al., 1997 MI vs. Educational Control Group The MI group showed greater: HIV knowledge (p<.0001) Perception of HIV risk (p<.001) Intention to protect (p<.003) Communication with partner (p<.05) And significantly lower rates of: Unprotected intercourse (p<.01) Substance abuse before sex (p<.001)
125	Carey et al., 2000 Health Psychology, 19:3-11 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Women at risk for HIV Nation US (Syracuse, NY) N 102 women from community MI 4 group MET sessions Comparison Attention placebo group Follow-up 3 and 12 weeks
126	Carey et al., 2000 MI vs. Educational Control Group The MI group showed greater: HIV knowledge (p<.003) Intention to protect (p<.001) And significantly lower rates of: Unprotected intercourse (p<.001) among women with imperfect intentions
127	Mental Health
128	Kemp et al., 1998 British Journal of Psychiatry, 172:413-419 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Acute psychiatric unit Nation UK (London, Maudsley Hospital) N 74 patients with psychosis MI 4-6 session Compliance Therapy Comparison 4-6 session supportive therapy Follow-up 18 months
129	Kemp et al., 1998 Clinician (Non-blind) Ratings of Improvement MI group rates significantly higher on Insight Global functioning Attitudes toward drug use Compliance
130	Kemp et al., 1998 MI group showed lower rates of: Treatment drop-out 28% vs. 43% (ns) Readmission Relative risk of controls = 2.2
131	Swanson et al., 1999 Journal of Nervous & Mental Disease, 187:630-635 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Psychiatric inpatients Nation US (New York) N 121 inpatients MI 2 sessions (15, 60 min) + TAU Comparison TAU Follow-up Transition to aftercare
132	Swanson et al., 1999
133	Smoking
134	Colby et al., 1998 Journal of Consulting & Clinical Psychology, 66:574-578 Design Randomized clinical trial Population Hospital emergency room Nation US (Providence, RI) N 40 adolescent smokers MI 1 MET session with 4 videos Comparison Brief advice Follow-up 3 months
135	Colby et al., 1998
136	Stotts et al., 2002 Addictive Behaviors, 27:275-292 Design Randomized clinical trial Population 21 prenatal care clinics Nation USA (Houston and Dallas, TX) N 269 resistant pregnant smokers MI 2 MI phone calls (20-30 min) Comparison TAU Follow-up to 6 months post-partum
137	Stotts et al., 2002
138	Stotts et al., 2002