Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-03T22:59:43.168Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Degree of Bedroom Personalization in Institutional and Homelike Settings for Persons with Dementia: A Quantitative Investigation

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

Anderson W. Chuck ,
Doris L. Milke  and
Charles H.M. Beck
Anderson W. Chuck*
Affiliation:
Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta
Doris L. Milke
Affiliation:
The CAPITAL CARE Group, Edmonton, AB
Charles H.M. Beck
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, University of Alberta
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to: / Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être addressées à : Anderson W. Chuck, Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Alberta, 11131–35 Ave., Edmonton, AB T6J 3M6. (achuck@ualberta.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to provide an empirical measure of bedroom personalization and a descriptive characterization of the types of items included in a personalized space. The study compared the extent of personalization in three types of bedrooms, varying as to their homelike quality (private-homelike, private-institutional, and ward-institutional). A measure of the relative degree of personalization was obtained by recording the number of personal items for each room and dividing the number of items per room by each room's available vertical and horizontal surface area. The degree of personalization was found to be significantly greater in private-homelike rooms than in private-institutional or ward-institutional rooms. This study provides the first demonstration that personalization of a resident's bedroom can be quantified and opens the way for studies of factors contributing to the effect (e.g., facility regulations, family, and staff attitudes) and empirical studies of presumed consequences (e.g., resident satisfaction and improved functioning).

Résumé

Le but de cette étude était de fournir une mesure empirique de la personnalisation des chambres à coucher et une caractérisation descriptive des types d'éléments que l'on trouve dans un espace personnalisé. L'étude a comparé l'étendue de la personnalisation de trois types de chambres qui se distinguaient du point de vue de leur atmosphère familiale (pièce privée familiale; pièce privée institutionnelle et salle institutionnelle). Une mesure du degré relatif de personnalisation a été obtenue en consignant le nombre d'objets personnels dans chaque pièce et en divisant le nombre d'objets dans la pièce par la surface verticale et horizontale disponible dans la pièce. L'étude a révélé que le degré de personnalisation était sensiblement supérieur dans les pièces privées d'atmosphère familiale que dans les pièces privées institutionnelles et les salles institutionnelles. Cette étude est la première à démontrer que la personnalisation de la chambre d'un résident peut être quantifiée, et elle ouvre la voie à l'étude des facteurs qui contribuent aux effets (par exemple, les règlements des lieux, l'attitude de la famille et du personnel) ainsi qu'à des études empiriques sur les conséquences présumées (par exemple, la satisfaction des résidents et l'amélioration du fonctionnement).

Keywords

agingpersonalizationAlzheimerdementiaenvironmenthomelikenesslong-term carevieillissementpersonnalisationAlzheimerdémenceenvironnementatmosphère familialesoins de longue durée
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 24 , Issue 4 , Winter/Hiver 2005 , pp. 329 - 337
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2005

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

Albert, M., & Cohen, C. (1992). The test for severe impairment: An instrument for the assessment of patients with severe cognitive dysfunction. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 40(5), 449–453.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
American Institute of Architects (1992). Design for aging: 1992 Review. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar
Aronson, E., Ellsworth, P.C., & Carlsmith, J.M. (1990). Methods of research in social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Canadian Study of Health and Aging Working Group (1994). Canadian study of health and aging: Study methods and prevalence of dementia. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150(6), 899–912.Google Scholar
The Capital Care Group (2000). The Capital Care Group policy Manual. Edmonton, AB: Author.Google Scholar
Carey, A., & Thompson, T. (1980). Structured normalization: Intellectual and adaptive behaviour changes. Mental Retardation, 18, 193–197.Google Scholar
Cohen, U., & Day, K. (1993). Contemporary environments for people with dementia. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cohen, U., & Weisman, G.D. (1991). Holding on to home: Designing environments for people with dementia. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Folstein, J., Folstein, S., & McHugh, P.R. (1975). Mini-mental state: A practical method of grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189–195.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hiatt, L.G. (1990). Design of the home environment for the cognitively impaired person. In Mace, N.L. (Ed.), Dementia care: Patient, family, and community (pp. 231–242). Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press.Google Scholar
Hoglund, J.D. (1995, November) Place makes a difference: advances in assisted living for older adults. Paper presented at the 48th annual meeting of the Gerontological Society of America, Pittsburgh, PA.Google Scholar
Kruzich, J.M., Clinton, J.F., & Kelber, S.T. (1992). Personal and environmental influences on nursing home satisfaction. The Gerontologist, 32(3), 342–350.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lawrence, R.J. (1987). What makes a house a home? Environment and Behaviour, 19, 155–156.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lawton, M.P., Weisman, G.D., Sloane, P., Norris-Baker, C., Calkins, M., & Zimmerman, S.I. (1998). Professional environmental assessment procedure for special care units for elders with dementing illness and its relationship to the therapeutic environment screening schedule. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 14(1), 28–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Millard, P., & Smith, C.S. (1981). Personal belongings: A positive effect? Gerontologist, 21(1), 85–90.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Namazi, K.H., Eckert, J.K., Rosner, T.T., & Lyon, S. (1991). The meaning of home for the elderly in pseudo-familial environments. Adult Residential Care Journal, 5(2), 81–96.Google Scholar
Schwarz, B. (1996). Nursing home design. New York: Garland.Google Scholar
Sherman, E. (1991). Reminiscentia: Cherished objectives as memorabilita in late-life reminiscences. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 33(2), 89–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisman, G., Calkins, M., Sloane, P., & Zimmerman, S.I. (1995). Therapeutic environment screening scale (TESS2+): Instrument B. Milwaukee, WI: National Institute on Aging.Google Scholar
White, C.B., & Janson, P. (1986). Helplessness in institutional settings: Adaptation or iatrogenic disease? In Baltes, M.M. & Baltes, P.B. (Eds.), The psychology of control and aging (pp. 297–313). New Jersey, NY: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar