Cargando…
Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study
The study was designed to evaluate the acceptance of the self-rated version of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in primary care in Europe (STEP) by patients and general practitioners, as well as the feasibility, comprehensibility, and usefulness in gaining new information. In all, 1007...
Autores principales: | , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Dove Medical Press
2013
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23671388 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S41826 |
_version_ | 1782269034074472448 |
---|---|
author | Frese, Thomas Hein, Susanne Sandholzer, Hagen |
author_facet | Frese, Thomas Hein, Susanne Sandholzer, Hagen |
author_sort | Frese, Thomas |
collection | PubMed |
description | The study was designed to evaluate the acceptance of the self-rated version of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in primary care in Europe (STEP) by patients and general practitioners, as well as the feasibility, comprehensibility, and usefulness in gaining new information. In all, 1007 of 1540 patients aged 65 and above, from 28 different Saxon general practices took part. We recognized that 96% of the patients were able to fill in the questionnaire by themselves. It took them an average of approximately 20 minutes to do so. Further analysis of 257 randomly selected patients identified 281 previously unknown problems (1.1 per patient). In the practitioners’ opinion, 16% of these problems, particularly physiological and mental ones, could lead to immediate consequences. Remarkably, newly identified psychosocial problems were not followed by any consequences. Fourteen of the 75 questionnaire items were not answered by more than 9% of the participants. Eight of the 14 frequently unanswered items were marked as difficult to understand by the patients. Altogether the self-rating version of the STEP was found to be feasible and useful. It was well accepted among patients; however, some questions need further review to improve their comprehensibility. Furthermore, it should be investigated why some identified problems do not have consequences and whether there is a need to record these issues at all. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-3649857 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2013 |
publisher | Dove Medical Press |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-36498572013-05-13 Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study Frese, Thomas Hein, Susanne Sandholzer, Hagen Clin Interv Aging Original Research The study was designed to evaluate the acceptance of the self-rated version of the Standardized Assessment of Elderly People in primary care in Europe (STEP) by patients and general practitioners, as well as the feasibility, comprehensibility, and usefulness in gaining new information. In all, 1007 of 1540 patients aged 65 and above, from 28 different Saxon general practices took part. We recognized that 96% of the patients were able to fill in the questionnaire by themselves. It took them an average of approximately 20 minutes to do so. Further analysis of 257 randomly selected patients identified 281 previously unknown problems (1.1 per patient). In the practitioners’ opinion, 16% of these problems, particularly physiological and mental ones, could lead to immediate consequences. Remarkably, newly identified psychosocial problems were not followed by any consequences. Fourteen of the 75 questionnaire items were not answered by more than 9% of the participants. Eight of the 14 frequently unanswered items were marked as difficult to understand by the patients. Altogether the self-rating version of the STEP was found to be feasible and useful. It was well accepted among patients; however, some questions need further review to improve their comprehensibility. Furthermore, it should be investigated why some identified problems do not have consequences and whether there is a need to record these issues at all. Dove Medical Press 2013 2013-05-06 /pmc/articles/PMC3649857/ /pubmed/23671388 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S41826 Text en © 2013 Frese et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited. |
spellingShingle | Original Research Frese, Thomas Hein, Susanne Sandholzer, Hagen Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title | Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title_full | Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title_fullStr | Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title_full_unstemmed | Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title_short | Feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the STEP self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
title_sort | feasibility, understandability, and usefulness of the step self-rating questionnaire: results of a cross-sectional study |
topic | Original Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3649857/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/23671388 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/CIA.S41826 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fresethomas feasibilityunderstandabilityandusefulnessofthestepselfratingquestionnaireresultsofacrosssectionalstudy AT heinsusanne feasibilityunderstandabilityandusefulnessofthestepselfratingquestionnaireresultsofacrosssectionalstudy AT sandholzerhagen feasibilityunderstandabilityandusefulnessofthestepselfratingquestionnaireresultsofacrosssectionalstudy |