Skip to main content

Table 3 Patients' perspectives on the usefulness and feasibility of the SIPP

From: The usefulness and feasibility of a screening instrument to identify psychosocial problems in patients receiving curative radiotherapy: a process evaluation

  Scores:
theoretical
range
n Mean score (SD) Scores:
observed
range
Negative
perspective (%)a
Score ≤ 4
Moderate
perspective (%)a
Score 5, 6
Positive
perspective
(%)a
Score ≥ 7
1. Time to complete the screening instrument Open question (minutes) 256 5.3 (3.5) 1-20 ---- ---- ----
Instruments' content subscale:        
2. Understanding the items 0(Not easy to understand)-
10(Easy to understand)
258 8.9 (1.3) 0-10 0.4 2.2 93.7
3. The instrument is pleasant to complete 0(Not pleasant to complete)-
10(Very pleasant to complete)
259 8.4 (1.5) 0-10 1.5 3.7 91.5
4. Importance of the subjects 0(Not important)-
10(Very important)
258 8.0 (1.6) 0-10 1.5 11.5 83.2
Communication aspects subscale:        
5. Importance of discussing
the screening instrument with radiotherapist
0(Not important)-
10(Very important)
237 7.4 (2.3) 0-10 8.0 12.7 67.5
6. Physical complaints in the screening instrument were discussed with radiotherapist 0(Not discussed) -
10(Extensively discussed)
250 6.2 (3.1) 0-10 18.9 17.9 56.3
7. Psychosocial complaints in the screening instrument were discussed with radiotherapist 0(Not discussed)-
10(Extensively discussed)
249 4.6 (3.6) 0-10 37.3 16.5 39.3
8. Sexual problems in the screening instrument were discussed with radiotherapist 0(Not discussed)-
10(Extensively discussed)
241 1.6 (2.7) 0-10 73.1 7.5 9.3
9. The screening instrument was a useful tool to discuss physical complaints with radiotherapist 0(Not useful)-
10(Very useful)
246 4.1 (3.6) 0-10 43.7 17.5 30.6
10. The screening instrument was a useful tool to discuss psychosocial complaints with radiotherapist 0(Not useful)-
10(Very useful)
242 3.5 (3.6) 0-10 48.4 15.3 26.5
11. The screening instrument was a useful tool to discuss sexual problems with radiotherapist 0(Not useful)-
10(Very useful)
234 1.7 (2.8) 0-10 67.7 10.8 8.9
12. Discussing the screening instrument scores with the radiotherapist was pleasant 0(Not pleasant)-
10(Very pleasant)
223 6.4 (2.7) 0-10 11.2 24.6 47.4
Open questions for remarks        
13. Is there a subject that was missing from the screening instrument? No-Yes, namely... 5 ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
14. Have you any remarks? No-Yes, namely... 0 ---- ---- ---- ---- ----
  1. SD: Standard deviation
  2. aDue to possible missing values for several items, not all the scores add up to 100%