The Ottawa Self-Injury Inventory: Evaluation of an assessment measure of nonsuicidal self-injury in an inpatient sample of adolescents

Chinese Medicine

Paula F. Cloutier⁵  John Vanderkooy²  Michèle Preyde⁴  Christine Levesque³  Mary K Nixon¹ 

[1] Queen Alexandra Centre for Children’s Health, 2400 Arbutus Rd, Victoria V8N 1V7, BC, Canada;Homewood Health Centre, 150 Delhi St, Guelph N1E 6 K9, ON, Canada;University of Ottawa, 136 Jean-Jacques Lussier, Ottawa K1N 6 N5, ON, Canada;College of Social and Applied Human Sciences, University of Guelph, 50 Stone Road East Mackinnon 138, Guelph N1G 2 W1, ON, Canada;Mental Health Research, Children’s Hospital of Eastern Ontario, 401 Smyth Rd, Ottawa K1H 8 L1, ON, Canada

关键词: Youth;    Addictive features;    Functions;    Assessment;    Nonsuicidal self-injury;   

Others  :  1223173
DOI  :  10.1186/s13034-015-0056-5

 received in 2015-03-27, accepted in 2015-06-10,  发布年份 2015

【 摘 要 】

Background

The Ottawa Self-Injury Inventory (OSI) is a self-report measure that offers a comprehensive assessment of nonsuicidal self-injury (NSSI), including measurement of its functions and addictive features. In a preliminary investigation of self injuring college students who completed the OSI, exploratory analysis revealed four function factors (Internal Emotion Regulation, Social Influence, External Emotion Regulation and Sensation Seeking) and a single Addictive Features factor. Rates of NSSI are particularly high in inpatient psychiatry youth. The OSI can assistin both standardizing assessment regarding functions and potential addictive features and aid case formulation leading to informed treatment planning. This report will describe a confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) of the OSI on youth hospitalized in a psychiatric unit in southwestern Ontario.

Methods

Demographic and self-report data were collected from all youth consecutively admitted to an adolescent in-patient unit who provided consent or assent.

Results

The mean age of the sample was 15.71 years (SD = 1.5) and 76 (81 %) were female. The CFA proved the same four function factors relevant, as in the previous study on college students (χ² (183) = 231.98, p = .008; χ² /df = 1.27; CFI = .91; RMSEA = .05). The model yielded significant correlations between factors (rs = .44-.90, p < .001). Higher NSSI frequency was related to higher scores on each function factor (rs = .24-.29, p < .05), except the External Emotion Regulation factor (r = .11, p > .05). The factor structure of the Addictive Features function was also confirmed (χ² (14) = 21.96, p > .05; χ² /df = 1.57; CFI = .96; RMSEA = .08). All the items had significant path estimates (.52 to .80). Cronbach’s alpha for the Addictive Features scale was .84 with a mean score of 16.22 (SD = 6.90). Higher Addictive Features scores were related to more frequent NSSI (r = .48, p < .001).

Conclusions

Results show further support for the OSI as a valid and reliable assessment tool in adolescents, in this case in a clinical setting, where results can inform case conceptualization and treatment planning.

【 授权许可】

   
2015 Nixon et al.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Jacobson CM, Gould M. The epidemiology and phenomenology of non-suicidal self-injurious behavior among adolescents: a critical review of the literature. Arch Suicide Res. 2007; 11:129-47.
• [2]Nock MK, Prinstein MJ. A functional approach to the assessment of self-mutilative behavior. J Consult Clin Psychol. 2004; 72:885-90.
• [3]Preyde M, Vanderkooy J, Chevalier P, Heintzman J, Warne A, Barrick K. The psychosocial characteristics associated with NSSI and suicide attempt of youth admitted to an inpatient psychiatric unit. J Can Acad Child Adolescents Psychiatry. 2014; 23:100-11.
• [4]Ougrin D, Boege I. Brief report: The self-harm questionnaire: A new tool designed to improve identification of self-harm in adolescents. Journal of Adolescence. 2013;doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.09.006
• [5]Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 5th ed. American Psychiatric Publishing, Arlington, VA; 2013.
• [6]Suyemoto KL. The functions of self-mutilation. Clin Psychol Rev. 1998; 18:531-54.
• [7]Klonsky D. The functions of deliberate self-injury: a review of the evidence. Clin Psychol Rev. 2007; 27:226-39.
• [8]Nixon MK, Cloutier PF, Aggarwal S. Affect regulation and addictive aspects of repetitive self-injury in hospitalized adolescents. J Am Academy of Child and Adolescents Psychiatry. 2002; 41:1333-41.
• [9]Nock MK. Why do people hurt themselves? New insights into the nature and functions of self-injury. Current Directions in Psychological Science. 2009; doi:10.1111/j.14678721.2009.01613.x
• [10]American Psychiatric Association. Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders. 4th ed. ext. rev. Washington, DC: American Psychiatric Association; 2000.
• [11]Victor SE, Glenn CR, Klonsky ED. Is non-suicidal self-injury an “addiction”? A comparison of craving in substance use and non-suicidal self-injury. Psychiatry Research. 2013;doi:10.1016/j.psychres.2011.12.011.
• [12]Cloutier PF, Humphreys L. Measurement of self-injury in adolescents. In: Self-injury in youth: the essential guide to assessment and intervention. Nixon MK, Heath NL, editors. Routledge Press, New York, NY; 2009: p.115-42.
• [13]Klonsky D, Weinberg A. Assessment of nonsuicidal self-injury. In: Understanding non suicidal self-injury: origins, assessment, and treatment. Nock MK, editor. American Psychological Association, Washington, DC; 2009: p.183-99.
• [14]Klonsky ED, Glenn CR. Assessing the functions of non-suicidal self-injury: Psychometric properties of the Inventory of Statements About Self-Injuiry (ISAS). J Psychopathol Behav Assess. 2009.
• [15]Lloyd EE, Kelley ML, Hope T. Self-mutilation in a community sample of adolescents: Descriptive characteristics and provisional prevalence rates. Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Society for Behavioural Medicine, New Orleans; 1997.
• [16]Martin J, Cloutier PF, Levesque C, Bureau J-F, Lafontaine M-F, Nixon, MK. Psychometric properties of the functions and addictive features scales of the Ottawa Self-injury Inventory: A preliminary investigation using a university aged sample. Psychological Assessment. 2013;doi:. 10. 1037/a0032575 webcite
• [17]IBM Corp. Released 2012. IBM SPSS for Windows. Version 21.0. Armonk, NY: IBM Corp.
• [18]Arbuckle JL. Amos (Version 20.0) [Computer software]. IBM SPSS, Chicago; 2011.
• [19]Tabachnick BG, Fidell LS. Using multivariate statistics. 5th ed. Allyn & Bacon, Boston; 2007.
• [20]Byrne BM. Structural equation modeling with AMOS: basic concepts, applications, and programming. 2nd ed. Routledge, New York; 2010.
• [21]Heath N, Schaub K, Holly S, Nixon M. Self-injury today. Review of population and clinical studies in adolescents. In: Self-injury in youth: the essential guide to assessment and intervention. Nixon MK, Heath NL, editors. Routledge Press, New York, NY; 2009: p.9-27.
• [22]Seiffge-Krenke I, Beyers W. Coping trajectories from adolescence to young adulthood: links to attachment state of mind. Journal of Research on Adolescence. 2005;doi:10.1111/j.1532-7795.2005.00111.x.
• [23]Hinduja S, Patchin JW. Social influences on cyberbullying behaviors among middle and high school students. J Youth Adolesc. 2013; 42:711-22.
• [24]Ougrin D, Tranah T, Stahl D, Moran P, Asarnow JR. Therapeutic interventions for suicide attempts and self-Harm in adolescents: Systematic review and meta-analysis. Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. 2015;doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2014.10.009
• [25]Brent DA, McMakin DL, Kennard BD, Goldstein TR, Mayes TL, Douaihy AB. Protecting adolescents from self-harm: A critical review of intervention studies. Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry. 2013;doi:10.1016/j.jaac.2013.09.009.
• [26]Washburn J, Richardt SL, Styer DM, Gebhardt M, Juzwin KR, Yourek A, Aldridge D. Psychotheratpeutic approaches to non-suicidal self-injury in adolescents. Child and Adolescent Psychiatry and Mental Health. 2012; doi:10.1186/1753-2000-6-14