Motivational interviewing with couples: A theoretical framework for clinical practice illustrated in substance use and HIV prevention intervention with gay male couples

Epidemiological data indicate the need to address substance use and sexual HIV transmission risk among gay and bisexual men in relationships. While brief Motivational Interviewing (MI) delivered to the individual has shown efficacy in reducing sexual HIV risk with casual partners and substance use, the application of MI with couples has received less attention. Most studies of MI with couples have conceptualized the "spouse" or partner as an adjunct participant in the treatment of an identified client. We propose a theoretical framework for conducting MI with a couple, which approaches the couple as the identified client, and may be adopted when either one or both partners engage in the target behavior. We then discuss similarities between MI-processes conceptualized with our proposed framework and those that are salient in existing couples therapies. We utilize case examples from brief MI sessions targeting substance use and sexual HIV risk in gay male couples to illustrate three phenomena unique to the implementation of MI with couples: 1) interpersonal ambivalence; 2) the role of dyadic functioning in tolerating and resolving interpersonal ambivalence; and 3) joint goal formation as a prerequisite to the planning phase of MI. Connecting these phenomena with the transformation of motivation and accommodation processes outlined in Couples Interdependence Theory, this paper suggests that brief MI may be a promising modality for substance use and HIV risk reduction interventions with couples generally and gay couples specifically.

How Should We Study Residential Recovery Homes?

PURPOSE

Persons with serious alcohol and drug problems who are attempting to maintain abstinence often lack an alcohol and drug free living environment that supports sustained recovery. Residential recovery homes, called "sober living houses" in California, are alcohol and drug-free living environments that offer long-term support for persons with addictive disorders. They do not offer formal treatment services but usually encourage or mandate attendance at self-help recovery groups such as Alcoholics Anonymous.

APPROACH

This paper weighs the strengths and weaknesses of different research designs for studying residential recovery homes. Alternatives to randomized designs that are able to capture "real world" data that are readily generalized are described and understudied topics are identified.

FINDINGS

A significant limitation of traditional randomized designs is they eliminate mutual selection processes between prospective residents and recovery home residents and staff. Naturalistic research designs have the advantage of including mutual selection processes and there are methods available for limiting self-selection bias. Qualitative methods should be used to identify factors that residents experience as helpful that can then be studied further. Innovative studies are needed to investigate how outcomes are affected by architectural characteristics of the houses and resident interactions with the surrounding community.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

Use of the recommended strategies could lead to findings that are more informative, intuitively appealing, and interpretable.

SOCIAL IMPLICATIONS

Recovery homes and similar programs will be more responsive to consumers.

ORIGINALITY

This paper represents one of the first to review various options for studying recovery homes and to provide suggestions for new studies.

Prevention And Treatment of Hypertension With Algorithm-based therapy (PATHWAY) number 2: protocol for a randomised crossover trial to determine optimal treatment for drug-resistant hypertension

INTRODUCTION

Resistant hypertension is inadequately controlled blood pressure (BP) despite treatment with at least three BP-lowering drugs. A popular hypothesis is that resistant hypertension is due to excessive Na(+)-retention, and that 'further diuretic therapy' will be superior to alternative add-on drugs.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Placebo-controlled, random crossover study of fourth-line treatment when added to standard (A+C+D) triple drug therapy: ACE inhibitor or Angiotensin receptor blocker (A) +Calcium channel blocker (C)+Diuretic (D). Patients (aged 18-79 years) with clinical systolic BP ≥ 140 mm Hg (135 mm Hg in diabetics) and Home BP Monitoring (HBPM) systolic BP average ≥ 130 mm Hg on treatment for at least 3 months with maximum tolerated doses of A+C+D are randomised to four consecutive randomly allocated 12-week treatment cycles with an α-blocker, β-blocker, spironolactone and placebo. The hierarchical coprimary end point is the difference in HBPM average systolic BP between (in order) spironolactone and placebo, spironolactone and the average of the other two active drugs, spironolactone and each of the other two drugs. A key secondary outcome is to determine whether plasma renin predicts the BP response to the different drugs. A sample size of 346 (allowing 15% dropouts) will confer 90% power to detect a 3 mm Hg HBPM average systolic BP difference between any two drugs. The study can also detect a 6 mm Hg difference in HBPM average systolic BP between each patient's best and second-best drug predicted by tertile of plasma renin.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

The study was initiated in May 2009 and results are expected in 2015. These will provide RCT evidence to support future guideline recommendations for optimal drug treatment of resistant hypertension.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Clinicaltrials.gov NCT02369081, EUDract number: 2008-007149-30.

Glutenase ALV003 attenuates gluten-induced mucosal injury in patients with celiac disease

BACKGROUND & AIMS

Gluten ingestion leads to small intestinal mucosal injury in patients with celiac disease, necessitating strict life-long exclusion of dietary gluten. Despite adherence to a gluten-free diet, many patients remain symptomatic and still have small intestinal inflammation. In this case, nondietary therapies are needed. We investigated the ability of ALV003, a mixture of 2 recombinant gluten-specific proteases given orally, to protect patients with celiac disease from gluten-induced mucosal injury in a phase 2 trial.

METHODS

We established the optimal daily dose of gluten to be used in a 6-week challenge study. Then, in the intervention study, adults with biopsy-proven celiac disease were randomly assigned to groups given ALV003 (n = 20) or placebo (n = 21) together with the daily gluten challenge. Duodenal biopsies were collected at baseline and after gluten challenge. The ratio of villus height to crypt depth and densities of intraepithelial lymphocytes were the primary end points.

RESULTS

A daily dose of 2 g gluten was selected for the intervention study. Sixteen patients given ALV003 and 18 given placebo were eligible for efficacy evaluation. Biopsies from subjects in the placebo group showed evidence of mucosal injury after gluten challenge (mean villus height to crypt depth ratio changed from 2.8 before challenge to 2.0 afterward; P = .0007; density of CD3(+) intraepithelial lymphocytes changed from 61 to 91 cells/mm after challenge; P = .0003). However, no significant mucosal deterioration was observed in biopsies from the ALV003 group. Between groups, morphologic changes and CD3(+) intraepithelial lymphocyte counts differed significantly from baseline to week 6 (P = .0133 and P = .0123, respectively). There were no statistically significant differences in symptoms between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Based on a phase 2 trial, the glutenase ALV003 appears to attenuate gluten-induced small intestinal mucosal injury in patients with celiac disease in the context of an everyday gluten-free diet containing daily up to 2 g gluten. Clinicaltrial.gov,

NUMBERS

NCT00959114 and NCT01255696.