Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-j824f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T17:35:32.364Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Checklist of Unit Behaviors (CUB): psychometric properties of a measure of patient milieu engagement on an acute inpatient psychiatric unit

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 January 2013

Bjorn Hanson ,
Denada Hoxha ,
Patricia Roberts  and
Jackie K. Gollan
Bjorn Hanson
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University, USA College of Psychology, Illinois Institute of Technology, USA
Denada Hoxha
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University, USA
Patricia Roberts
Affiliation:
Stone Institute of Psychiatry, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, USA
Jackie K. Gollan*
Affiliation:
Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University, USA Stone Institute of Psychiatry, Northwestern Memorial Hospital, USA
*
Correspondence to: Dr Jackie K. Gollan, Department of Psychiatry and Behavioral Sciences, Northwestern University's Feinberg School of Medicine, 446 East Ontario Street, Suite 7-100, Chicago, IL 60611, USA. E-mail: j-gollan@northwestern.edu
Get access

Abstract

Objective

This paper presents the psychometric properties, including factor structure, internal reliability and relative validity of a 16-item questionnaire measuring patients’ relative activation with milieu activities while hospitalised in an acute psychiatric inpatient unit.

Method

24 hours after admission, and before discharge, psychiatric inpatients (N = 132) completed a set of validated self-reports and the pilot questionnaire, the Checklist of Unit Behaviors (CUB). The CUB outlines items that reflect the extent to which the patient avoided or engaged with the treatment milieu within the previous 24 hours. Factor analysis, bivariate correlations and repeated-measures t-tests were used to analyse the data.

Results

Factor analysis identified two factors for the CUB: (1) Behavioural Approach; and (2) Behavioural Avoidance. Psychometric properties were satisfactory (Approach, Cronbach's α = 0.93; Avoidance, Cronbach's α = 0.79). Over the course of treatment, CUB-Approach increased (p < 0.001) and CUB-Avoidance decreased (p < 0.001). The construct validity of the CUB was supported through correlations with measures of positive and negative affect.

Conclusions

The CUB demonstrates strong psychometric properties, quantifying patients’ behavioural activation in the treatment milieu. Daily use of the CUB provides clinically useful information that has the potential to improve patient care and treatment planning.

Keywords

Approachavoidancepsychiatric intensive care unitstreatment engagementmeasurement
Type
Original Research Article
Information
Journal of Psychiatric Intensive Care , Volume 9 , Issue 2 , August 2013 , pp. 101 - 109
Copyright
Copyright © NAPICU 2013 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Blader, J.C. (2011) Acute inpatient care for psychiatric disorders in the United States, 1996 through 2007. Archives of General Psychiatry. 68(12): 1276–1283.Google Scholar
Bruder-Mattson, S.F., Hovanitz, C.A. (1990) Coping and attributional styles as predictors of depression. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 46(5): 557–565.Google Scholar
Carver, C.S., White, T.L. (1994) Behavioral inhibition, behavioral activation, and affective responses to impending reward and punishment: the BIS/BAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 67: 319–333.Google Scholar
DeGenova, M.K., Patton, D.M., Jurich, J.A., MacDermid, S.M. (1994) Ways of coping among HIV-infected individuals. Journal of Social Psychology. 134(5): 655–663.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Derogatis, L.R. (1993) Brief Symptom Inventory: Administration, Scoring, and Procedures Manual. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.Google Scholar
Derogatis, L.R., Spencer, P.M. (1982) The Brief Symptom Inventory (BSI): Administration, and Procedural Manual-I. Baltimore, MD: Clinical Psychometric Research.Google Scholar
Gray, J.A. (1970) The psychophysiological basis of introversion-extraversion. Behaviour and Research Therapy. 8(3): 249–266.Google Scholar
Gray, J.A. (1981) A critique of Eysenck's theory of personality. In: Eysenck, H.J. (ed.). A Model for Personality. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Gray, J.A. (1982) The Neuropsychology of Anxiety: An Enquiry Into the Functions of the Septo-Hippocampal System. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
Ireland, S.J., McMahon, R.C., Malow, R.M., Kouzekanani, K. (1994) Coping style as a predictor of relapse to cocaine abuse. In: Harris, L.S. (ed.). Problems of Drug Dependence, 1993: Proceedings of the 55 thAnnual Scientific Meeting. National Institute on Drug Abuse Research Monograph Series 141, p. 159.Google Scholar
Kingston, J., Clarke, S., Remington, B. (2010) Experiential avoidance and problem behavior: a mediational analysis. Behavior Modification. 34(2): 145–163.Google Scholar
Kortte, K.B., Veiel, L., Batten, S.V., Wegener, S.T. (2009) Measuring avoidance in medical rehabilitation. Rehabilitation Psychology. 54(1): 91–98.Google Scholar
Obrist, P. (1976) The cardiovascular-behavioral interaction: as it appears today. Psychophysiology. 13(2): 95–107.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ottenbreit, N.D., Dobson, K.S. (2004) Avoidance and depression: the construction of the cognitive-behavioral avoidance scale. Behaviour and Research Therapy. 42(3): 293–313.Google Scholar
Schanowitz, J.Y., Nicassio, P.M. (2006) Predictors of positive psychosocial functioning of older adults in residential care facilities. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 29(2): 191–201.Google Scholar
Stowell, J.R., Kiecolt-Glaser, J.K., Glaser, R. (2001) Perceived stress and cellular immunity: when coping counts. Journal of Behavioral Medicine. 24(4): 323–339.Google Scholar
National Association of Pyschiatric Health Systems (2002) Trends in Behavioral Healthcare Systems: A Benchmarking Report. The NAPHS 2001 Annual Survey.Google Scholar
Tabachnick, B.G., Fidell, L.S. (2007) Using Multivariate Statistics. Boston, MA: Pearson Education, 980 pp.Google Scholar
Tanay, G., Lotan, G., Bernstein, A. (2012) Salutary proximal processes and distal mood and anxiety vulnerability outcomes of mindfulness training: a pilot preventive intervention. Behavior Therapy. 43(3): 492–505.Google Scholar
van de Wiel, H., Geerts, E., Hoekstra-Weebers, J. (2008) Explaining inconsistent results in cancer quality of life studies: the role of the stress-response system. Psychooncology. 17(2): 174–181.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Watson, D., Clark, L.A., Tellegen, A. (1988) Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: the PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 54(6): 1063–1070.Google Scholar