Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25422587›Full record

ArticlePatient preference and adherence2014

Efficacy of brief motivational interviewing to improve adherence to inhaled corticosteroids among adult asthmatics: results from a randomized controlled pilot feasibility trial.

Kim L Lavoie, Gregory Moullec, Catherine Lemiere, Lucie Blais, Manon Labrecque, Marie-France Beauchesne, Veronique Pepin, André Cartier, Simon L Bacon

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Patient preference and adherence, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
2.6field-weighted citation impact, top 11% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Interventions to improve adherence to inhaled steroids for asthma.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2017
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Observational
  10. Article
  11. CMAJ : Canadian Medical Association journal = journal de l'Association medicale canadienne · 2023
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Kim L LavoieMontreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Research Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Department of Psychology, University of Quebec at Montreal (UQAM), Succursale Center-Ville, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Gregory MoullecMontreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Research Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Department of Exercise Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Catherine LemiereResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Lucie BlaisResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Manon LabrecqueResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Marie-France BeauchesneResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Veronique PepinResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Department of Exercise Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
André CartierResearch Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
Simon L BaconMontreal Behavioural Medicine Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Research Centre, Hôpital du Sacré-Coeur de Montréal - A University of Montreal Affiliated Hospital, Montréal, Quebec, Canada ; Department of Exercise Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Université de Montréal · CAConcordia University · CAHôpital du Sacré-Cœur de Montréal · CAUniversité du Québec à Montréal · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeDaily adherence to inhaled corticosteroid (ICS) regimens is one of the most important factors linked to achieving optimal asthma control. Motivational interviewing (MI) is a client-centered communication style that focuses on enhancing intrinsic motivation to engage in appropriate self-management behaviors. MI has been shown to improve a variety of health behaviors including medication adherence in other disorders, but its efficacy for the improvement of ICS adherence in asthmatics has yet to be examined. This pilot "proof of concept" trial assessed the feasibility of MI to improve daily ICS adherence and asthma control levels in adult asthmatics.

methodsFifty-four poorly controlled (Asthma Control Questionnaire [ACQ] score ≥1.5), highly nonadherent (filled <50% of ICS medication in the last year) adult asthmatics were recruited from the outpatient asthma clinic of a university-affiliated hospital. Participants underwent baseline assessments and were randomly assigned to MI (3×30 minutes sessions within a 6-week period, n=26) or a usual care (UC) control group (n=28). ICS adherence (% pharmacy refills) and asthma control (ACQ, Asthma Control Test [ACT]) were measured at 6 and 12 months postintervention. Mixed model repeated measure analyses for both intent-to-treat and per-protocol were used. Results were adjusted for a priori-defined covariates including baseline adherence. Patients in the MI group also reported their impressions of the intervention.

resultsSix-month adjusted intent-to-treat analyses revealed a mean change in the percentage of ICS refills of 13% in the MI group vs 6% in the UC group (between group net improvement associated with MI =+6% [-12% to 24%]). Twelve-month analyses revealed a mean change in the percentage of ICS refills of 11% (MI group) vs 7% in the UC group (between group net improvement associated with MI =+3% [-11% to 18%]) representing an effect size (ES) of d=0.20 (medium). Six-month adjusted net improvement in ACQ and ACT scores between MI and control groups was -0.2 and +0.7, respectively, with improvements being even more pronounced at 12 months (ACQ =-0.5; ACT =+1.1; ES, d=0.12 and 0.18 [small], respectively). Interestingly, 6- and 12-month net improvements in asthma self-efficacy (which is specifically targeted by MI) improved by +0.4 and +0.4, respectively, with an ES of d=0.46 (marginally large). Patients in the MI group rated the intervention overwhelmingly positively in terms of usefulness, pertinence, feasibility, enjoyableness, and likelihood to change adherence behavior.

conclusionResults suggest that a brief (90 minutes) MI intervention that targets ICS adherence can produce clinically significant improvements in adherence behavior, asthma control levels, and asthma self-efficacy in poorly controlled nonadherent asthmatics at 6 months that are maintained for 1 year, and it is well accepted by patients. Future studies including larger sample sizes, modified intervention designs (eg, MI "booster" sessions), and assessments of the extent behavior changes translate into clinical improvements (eg, in asthma control and quality of life) are warranted.

Indexed as

adherenceasthmaasthma controlinhaled corticosteroidsmotivational interviewing

Identifiers

PMID25422587
PMCPMC4231985
OpenAlexW1985656743

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.