**A.1.1 Descriptive statistics**

**Table 1** presents descriptive statistics for the analyzed variables, i.e. mean values, standard deviations as well as minimum and maximum results. The list was also supplemented with the values of the Kolmogorov-Smirnov test verifying the assumption about the normality of the distribution of the analyzed variables and the values of skewness and kurtosis measures.

No statistically significant deviations from the normal distribution were obtained.


*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; min - minimum value; max - maximum value; Z - value of the Kolmogorov–Smirnov test; p - statistical significance; S - skewness measure; K - measure of kurtosis.*

#### **Table 1.**

*Descriptive statistics for the analyzed variables.*

#### **A.1.2 Results**

#### *A.1.2.1 Pain coping strategies*

Based on the results of the analysis of variance with repeated measures, it was found that there were statistically significant differences between the intensity of individual pain coping strategies, F (3.71; 166.97) = 9.33, p < 0.001, η<sup>2</sup> = 0.17. **Figure 3** shows the mean values of the intensity of the analyzed strategies along with the confidence intervals determined based on the Bonferroni correction.

It was found that praying/hoping was a strategy used more often than reevaluating pain sensations and ignoring sensations. Re-evaluation of pain sensations was a less frequently used strategy than distraction and catastrophizing.

**Table 2** presents the mean values of the intensity of coping strategies in the group of women and men. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There was a statistically significant difference in the prayer/hope strategy.

**Table 3** shows the Pearson r correlation coefficients between the age of the respondents and the coping strategies. Statistically significant correlations were marked.

#### **Figure 3.**

*The mean values of the intensity of the analyzed strategies with confidence intervals determined based on the Bonferroni correction.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 2.**

*Mean values of the intensity of coping with pain in the group of women and in the group of men.*


#### **Table 3.**

*Pearson's r correlation coefficients between the age of the respondents and the strategies of coping with pain.*

Statistically significant positive correlations were found between the age of the respondents and praying/hoping and increased behavioral activity.

**Table 4** shows the mean values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education and in the group of people with higher education. The summary was supplemented with the values of one-way analysis of variance.

No statistically significant differences were obtained.

**Table 5** shows the average values of pain coping strategies in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There were no statistically significant differences.

**Table 6** shows the average values of the pain coping strategies in the group of people with the average monthly net income per family member up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with the average monthly net income per family member above PLN 1,500. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's twosided t-test for independent samples.

There were no statistically significant differences.

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


**Table 4.**

*Average values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education and in the group of people with higher education.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 5.**

*Average values of the pain coping strategy in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants.*

**Table 7** presents the mean values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of working people and in the group of retirees and pensioners. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in terms of praying/hoping.

**Table 8** shows the mean values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of patients with diagnosed metastases and in the group of patients without metastases. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

Statistically significant intergroup differences in catastrophizing and declaring coping were obtained.

**Table 9** shows the mean values of the pain coping strategies in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy and those who were not undergoing chemotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 6.**

*Average values of the pain coping strategy in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member above PLN 1,500.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 7.**

*Average values of strategies for coping with pain in the group of working people and in the group of retirees and pensioners.*

The mean value of the level of praying/hoping was statistically significantly lower in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment than in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapy.

**Table 10** presents the mean values of the pain coping strategies in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group of people who were not treated with radiotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in the level of ignoring sensations.

**Table 11** shows the mean values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people who were undergoing targeted therapy and in the group of people *Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 8.**

*Mean values of strategies of coping with pain in the group of people with diagnosed metastases and in the group of people without metastases.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 9.**

*Average values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapy.*

who were not undergoing targeted therapy. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

Statistically significant differences between groups were obtained in terms of reevaluation of pain sensations and of ignoring sensations.

#### **A.1.3 Mental adjustment to neoplastic disease**

Based on the results of the analysis of variance with repeated measurements, it was found that there were also statistically significant differences between the intensity of individual indicators of mental adaptation to cancer, F (1.54; 69.45) = 9.37, p < 0.01, η<sup>2</sup> = 0.17. **Figure 4** shows the mean values of the intensity of the analyzed fitness indices together with the confidence intervals determined based on the Bonferroni correction.


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 10.**

*Average values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group of people who were not treated with radiotherapy.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p - statistical significance.*

#### **Table 11.**

*Mean values of the strategies of coping with pain in the group of people who were undergoing targeted therapy and in the group of people who were not undergoing targeted therapy.*

It was found that the mean values of the fighting spirit and positive reevaluation were statistically significantly higher than the mean value of the helplessness-hopelessness index.

**Table 12** presents the mean values of the mental adjustment indices in the group of women and in the group of men. The list was supplemented with the values of the Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There was a statistically significant difference in terms of the positive re-evaluation strategy.

**Table 13** shows the Pearson r correlation coefficients between the age of the respondents and the psychological adjustment indices. Statistically significant correlations were marked.

Statistically significant positive correlations were obtained between the age of the respondents and the fighting spirit index and a positive re-evaluation.

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*

#### **Figure 4.**

*The mean values of the indicators of mental adaptation to neoplastic disease with confidence intervals determined based on the Bonferroni correction.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 12.**

*Average values of mental adjustment indicators in the group of women and in the group of men.*


**Table 13.**

*Pearson's r correlation coefficients between the age of the respondents and the indicators of mental adjustment.*

**Table 14** shows the average values of the adaptation rates in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education and in the group of people with higher education. The summary was supplemented with the values of one-way analysis of variance.

Statistically significant differences were obtained in terms of a positive reevaluation. On the basis of Gabriel's post-hoc test, it was found that statistically significant differences existed between people with higher education and people


#### **Table 14.**

*Average values of the adaptation indicators in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education and in the group of people with higher education.*

with primary or vocational education, p < 0.05, and people with secondary education, p < 0.01.

**Table 15** shows the average values of the adaptation indicators in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There were no statistically significant differences.

**Table 16** shows the average values of the adaptation rates in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member of up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member above PLN 1,500. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in terms of a positive re-evaluation.

**Table 17** shows the average values of the adaptation indicators in the group of working people and in the group of retirees and pensioners. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in terms of a positive re-evaluation.


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 15.**

*Average values of adaptation indicators in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants.*

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 16.**

*Average values of adaptation indicators in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member above PLN 1,500.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 17.**

*Average values of adaptation indicators in the group of working people and in the group of retirees and disability pensioners.*

**Table 18** presents the mean values of the adaptation indices in the group of people with diagnosed metastases and in the group of people with no diagnosis of metastases. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in terms of the fighting spirit index.


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 18.**

*Average values of the adaptation indices in the group of people with diagnosed metastases and in the group of people without metastases.*

**Table 19** shows the mean values of the adaptation indices in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapeutic treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

No statistically significant differences were found.

**Table 20** shows the mean values of the adaptation indices in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There were no statistically significant differences.

**Table 21** presents the mean values of the adaptation indices in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group of people who were not treated with radiotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was obtained in terms of a positive reevaluation.

**Table 22** presents the mean values of the adaptation indices in the group of people who were under targeted treatment and in the group of people who were not under targeted therapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's twosided t-test for independent samples.


No statistically significant intergroup differences were obtained.

*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 19.**

*Average values of adaptation indices in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapeutic treatment.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 20.**

*Average values of adaptation indices in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapeutic treatment.*

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 21.**

*Average values of adaptation indicators in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group of people who were not treated with radiotherapy.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 22.**

*Average values of adaptation indices in the group of people who were under targeted treatment and in the group of people who were not under targeted treatment.*

#### **A.1.4 Acceptance of the disease**

The mean value of disease acceptance in the group of women was 22.54 with the standard deviation of 7.39, which was close to the mean value in the group of men, which was 23.77 with the standard deviation of 8.43. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the difference obtained was statistically insignificant, t (44) = 0.53, p > 0.05.

The disease acceptance did not correlate statistically with the age of the patients, r (44) = 0.03, p > 0.05.

The mean value of disease acceptance in the group of people with primary or vocational education was 22.08 with the standard deviation equal to 8.07, in the group with secondary education it was 23.43 with the standard deviation equal to 10.00, and in the group with higher education it was 23, 13 with a standard deviation of 5.69. Based on the value of the one-way analysis of variance, it was found that the obtained differences were statistically insignificant, F (2.43) = 0.02, p > 0.05.

The mean value of disease acceptance in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 was 23.12 with a standard deviation of 7.45 and was close to the average value obtained in the group of people who lived in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants, 23, 15 with a standard deviation of 8.51. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (44) = 0.01, p > 0.05.

The mean value of disease acceptance in the group of people with a net income of up to PLN 1,500 was 23.61 with a standard deviation of 8.65 and was close to the average value obtained in the group of people with income above PLN 1,500, which was 22.65 with a standard deviation of 7, 09. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (44) = 0.41, p > 0.05.

The mean value of disease acceptance in the working group was 24.85 with a standard deviation of 7.05 and was close to the mean value in the group of retirees and disability pensioners of 21.52 with a standard deviation of 8.70. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (41) = 1.37, p > 0.05.

The mean value of disease acceptance in the group of people diagnosed with metastases was 21.70 with a standard deviation of 6.00 and was close to the mean value of 25.05 in the group of non-metastatic patients with a standard deviation of 8.83. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (34.78) = 1.46, p > 0.05.

The mean disease acceptance value in the group of people who were on chemotherapy treatment was 22.84 with a standard deviation of 7.98, which was close to the mean value for the group of people who were not on chemotherapy treatment of 23.48 with a standard deviation of 7, 85. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (44) = 0.27, p > 0.05.

The mean disease acceptance value in the group of people who received radiotherapy was 24.87 with a standard deviation of 5.68 and was close to the mean value in the group of people who did not receive radiotherapy was 22.29 with a standard deviation of 8, 65. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was not statistically significant, t (39.27) = 1.21, p > 0.05.

The mean disease acceptance value in the group of people who were on targeted treatment was 25.70 with a standard deviation of 3.86 and was close to the mean value in the group of people who did not receive targeted therapy was 22.42 with a standard deviation of 8, 53. Based on the value of the Student's t-test for independent samples, it was found that the obtained difference was statistically insignificant, t (33.93) = 1.75, p > 0.05.

#### **A.1.5 Pain control**

**Table 23** shows the mean values of pain control dimensions in the men and women groups. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

There was a statistically significant difference in the internal locus of pain control. **Table 24** shows the Pearson r correlation coefficients between the age of the subjects and the dimensions of pain control.

No statistically significant correlations were obtained.

**Table 25** shows the mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education, and in the group of people with higher education. The summary was supplemented with the values of one-way analysis of variance.

No statistically significant differences were obtained.

**Table 26** shows the mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 23.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of women and the group of men.*


#### **Table 24.**

*Pearson's r correlation coefficients between the age of the subjects and the dimensions of pain control.*


#### **Table 25.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people with primary or vocational education, in the group of people with secondary education and in the group of people with higher education.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p - statistical significance.*

#### **Table 26.**

*Average values of pain control dimensions in the group of people living in towns with a population of up to 100,000 and in the group of people living in towns with more than 100,000 inhabitants.*

There were no statistically significant differences.

**Table 27** shows the mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member of up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p - statistical significance.*

#### **Table 27.**

*Average values of pain control dimensions in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member up to PLN 1,500 and in the group of people with an average monthly net income per family member above PLN 1,500.*

above PLN 1,500. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant difference was found in the location of pain control in random events.

**Table 28** shows the mean values of pain control dimensions in the working group and in the group of retirees and pensioners. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

No statistically significant differences were obtained.

**Table 29** shows the mean values of the dimensions of pain control in the group of patients with diagnosed metastases and in the group of individuals without diagnosis. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 28.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the working group and in the group of retirees and pensioners.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 29.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people who have not been diagnosed with metastases.*

*Assessment of Pain, Acceptance of Illness, Adjustment to Life and Strategies of Coping… DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.97325*

No statistically significant differences were obtained.

**Table 30** shows the mean values of the dimensions of pain control in the group of subjects who received chemotherapy and the group of subjects who were not receiving chemotherapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

No statistically significant differences were obtained.

**Table 31** shows the mean values of the dimensions of pain control in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group who were not


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 30.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people who were undergoing chemotherapy treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing chemotherapy treatment.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p statistical significance.*

#### **Table 31.**

*Mean values of the dimensions of pain control in the group of people who were treated with radiotherapy and in the group of people who were not treated with radiotherapy.*


*M.- average value; SD - standard deviation; t - value of the Student's t-test; df - the number of degrees of freedom; p - statistical significance.*

#### **Table 32.**

*Mean values of pain control dimensions in the group of people who were undergoing targeted treatment and in the group of people who were not undergoing targeted therapy.*

treated with radiation therapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

A statistically significant intergroup difference was obtained in the location of pain control in the influence of doctors.

**Table 32** shows the mean values of the dimensions of pain control in the group of people who were on targeted therapy and in the group of people who were not on targeted therapy. The list was supplemented with the values of Student's two-sided t-test for independent samples.

No statistically significant differences were obtained.
