2. Motivational Interviewing for CUD: current situation and gaps
Scientific community, clinicians and other actors involved in the prevention, treatment and harm reduction have a disposal a consistent body of evidence about the effectiveness of motivational interviewing for alcohol use disorder (AUD)s.
However, role of MI for approaching other substance use disorder is less clear. We will present published results of recent meta-analysis and will go beyond it conducting a analyses of gaps in the research of MI and CUD and suggesting potential solutions.
Systematic Review and Meta-analysis: Summary of results (chapter of psychological treatment) of a recent Guidelines for CUD from Spanish Society of Addiction (Socidrogalcohol) (author is also one of the coordinator of Guidelines) Analysis of gaps found in the literature and potential solutions.
MI is an effective intervention to reduce cannabis use and achieve abstinence in adults. MI is an effective intervention to achieve abstinence in adolscents. There isn’t enough evidence of MI response in reduction of CUD symptoms. MI in combination with cognitive-behavior therapy (CBT) (especially if it’s provided intensively) and contigency managment (CM) has better outcomes than MI alone.
Active ingredients and dose of MI for CUD aren’t analyzed in the literature. Cultural, gender and age aspects related to MI in CUD are the major gaps in the research, especially if it is compared with AUD.
Other gaps in this field are: predictos of response to MI, effectiveness in high-risk population (e.g.,people affected by psychosis), impact of MI in quality of life and functionality.
Despite the evidence in favour of MI for treating wide range of CUD alone or in combination with CBT and CM, there are many gaps in the literature regarding the MI, which should be addressed shortly. Especially those aspects related to cultural characteristics, specific populations and other person-centred key points.