This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

This is an 8-item self-report scale where respondents are asked to disagree or agree to 8 statements about their appearance using a 4-point likert scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). The minimum score is 8 and the maximum is 32, which higher scores indicating higher levels of appearance-related psychosocial distress. Klassen and colleagues (2016) used Rasch Measurement Theory (RMT) analysis to assess the psychometric properties of the measure. Person Separation Index (analogous to a reliability index) and Cronbach alpha values were 0.81 and 0.89 respectively. Convergent and predictive validity of this scale have not yet been assessed.

The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley & Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley & Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

The TSQ is a 10-item self-report questionnaire with items covering the different reactions that sometimes occur after a traumatic event. Respondents are asked to endorse Yes/No to whether or not they have experienced any of the following at least twice in the last week. Predictive validity of respondents who endorsed at least six of the re-experiencing or arousal items (in any combination) was excellent. Sensitivity was 0.86 and specificity was 0.93. Other research by Brewin, Fuchkan, Huntley & Scragg (2010) has indicated low specificity in non-white samples. Specificity was also low if the TSQ was administered early after the trauma but this improved in the eighteen months following the event.

This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

This is a general measure of patient's adherence to treatment, where respondents are asked how often they were able to adhere to their treatment. It has 5-items and a 6-point Likert response scale (None of the time/A little of the time/Some of the time/A good bit of the time/Most of the time/All of the time). The minimum score is 5 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating better adherence to treatment. The internal consistency of the measure has been found to be acceptable with a Cronbach's alpha of 0.81 (Hays, n.d).

This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

This includes 4 statements about the patient's treatment and 10 about their scarring, written by the chief investigator and based on clinical experience. The items address how the patient feels about their treatment, their expectations about ongoing treatment and healing and their role in the recovery process. The items focus on the patient's emotional responses to their scars and their perceptions about the impact the scars may have on their quality of life. These items are on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitely disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). For the treatment section, the minimum score is 4 and the maximum score is 16, with higher scores indicating better understanding of treatment. and better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively. For the scarring section, the minimum score is 10 and the maximum score is 40, with higher scores indicating better adjustment/more positive attitudes towards scarring respectively.

This is a 10-item measure developed specifically for the purpose of this study by the chief investigator. Patients are asked to respond to 6 statements on a 4-point agreement scale (Definitively disagree/Somewhat disagree/Somewhat agree/Definitely agree). This includes items such as 'the videos contained information that was relevant to me' and 'I found the videos upsetting to watch'. The minimum score is 6 and the maximum score is 24, with higher scores indicating higher acceptability and feasibility of the intervention. There are an additional 2 items asking the patient whether the time that they viewed video 1 and video 2 respectively was too soon after the injury, about right or too late after the injury.