Assessing patient satisfaction might help to detect so far unknown patient needs and could contribute to quality assurance within the health care system. We evaluated patient satisfaction and its correlates in a consecutive sample of patients undergoing external beam radiation therapy.

Background: To implement distress screening in routine radiotherapy practice and to compare computerised and paper-and-pencil screening in terms of acceptability and utility. Methods: We used the Stress Index RadioOncology (SIRO) for screening. In phase 1, 177 patients answered both a computerised and a paper version, and in phase 2, 273 patients filled out either the computerised or the paper assessment. Physicians received immediate feedback of the psycho-oncological results. Patients, nurses/radiographers ( n =27) and physicians ( n =15) evaluated the screening procedure. Results: The agreement between the computerised and the paper assessment was high (intra-class correlation=0.92). Patients’ satisfaction did not differ between the two administration modes. Nurses/radiographers rated the computerised assessment less time consuming (3.7 vs 18.5%), although the objective data did not reveal a difference in time demand. Physicians valued the psycho-oncological results as interesting and informative (46.7%). Patients and staff agreed that the distress screening did not lead to an increase in the discussion of psychosocial issues in clinician–patient encounters. Conclusion: The implementation of a distress screening was feasible and highly accepted, regardless of the administration mode. Communication trainings should be offered in order to increase the discussion of psychosocial topics in clinician–patient encounters.