A prospective in silico analysis of interdisciplinary and interobserver spatial variability in post-operative target delineation of high-risk oral cavity cancers: Does physician specialty matter?
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Ng SP
PROVIDER: S-EPMC6105928 | biostudies-literature | 2018 Aug
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
A prospective in silico analysis of interdisciplinary and interobserver spatial variability in post-operative target delineation of high-risk oral cavity cancers: Does physician specialty matter?
Ng Sweet Ping SP Dyer Brandon A BA Kalpathy-Cramer Jayashree J Mohamed Abdallah Sherif Radwan ASR Awan Musaddiq J MJ Gunn G Brandon GB Phan Jack J Zafereo Mark M Debnam J Matthew JM Lewis Carol M CM Colen Rivka R RR Kupferman Michael E ME Guha-Thakurta Nandita N Canahuate Guadalupe G Marai G Elisabeta GE Vock David D Hamilton Bronwyn B Holland John J Cardenas Carlos E CE Lai Stephen S Rosenthal David D Fuller Clifton David CD
Clinical and translational radiation oncology 20180802
<h4>Background</h4>The aim of this study was to determine the interdisciplinary agreement in identifying the post-operative tumor bed.<h4>Methods</h4>Three radiation oncologists (ROs), four surgeons, and three radiologists segmented post-operative tumor and nodal beds for three patients with oral cavity cancer. Specialty cohort composite contours were created by STAPLE algorithm implementation results for interspecialty comparison. Dice similarity coefficient and Hausdorff distance were utilized ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BACKGROUND:Data are lacking on the proportion of physicians who face malpractice claims in a year, the size of those claims, and the cumulative career malpractice risk according to specialty. METHODS:We analyzed malpractice data from 1991 through 2005 for all physicians who were covered by a large professional liability insurer with a nationwide client base (40,916 physicians and 233,738 physician-years of coverage). For 25 specialties, we reported the proportion of physicians who had malpractice claims in a year, the proportion of claims leading to an indemnity payment (compensation paid to a plaintiff), and the size of indemnity payments. We estimated the cumulative risk of ever being sued among physicians in high- and low-risk specialties. RESULTS:Each year during the study period, 7.4% of all physicians had a malpractice claim, with 1.6% having a claim leading to a payment (i.e., 78% of all claims did not result in payments to claimants). The proportion of physicians facing a claim each year ranged from 19.1% in neurosurgery, 18.9% in thoracic-cardiovascular surgery, and 15.3% in general surgery to 5.2% in family medicine, 3.1% in pediatrics, and 2.6% in psychiatry. The mean indemnity payment was $274,887, and the median was $111,749. Mean payments ranged from $117,832 for dermatology to $520,923 for pediatrics. It was estimated that by the age of 65 years, 75% of physicians in low-risk specialties had faced a malpractice claim, as compared with 99% of physicians in high-risk specialties. CONCLUSIONS:There is substantial variation in the likelihood of malpractice suits and the size of indemnity payments across specialties. The cumulative risk of facing a malpractice claim is high in all specialties, although most claims do not lead to payments to plaintiffs. (Funded by the RAND Institute for Civil Justice and the National Institute on Aging.).
| S-EPMC3204310 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundIn radiotherapy inaccuracy in organ at risk (OAR) delineation can impact treatment plan optimisation and treatment plan evaluation. Brouwer et al. showed significant interobserver variability (IOV) in OAR delineation in head and neck cancer (HNC) and published international consensus guidelines (ICG) for OAR delineation in 2015. The aim of our study was to evaluate IOV in the presence of these guidelines.MethodsHNC radiation oncologists (RO) from each Belgian radiotherapy centre were invited to complete a survey and submit contours for 5 HNC cases. Reference contours (OARref) were obtained by a clinically validated artificial intelligence-tool trained using ICG. Dice similarity coefficients (DSC), mean surface distance (MSD) and 95% Hausdorff distances (HD95) were used for comparison.ResultsFourteen of twenty-two RO (64%) completed the survey and submitted delineations. Thirteen (93%) confirmed the use of delineation guidelines, of which six (43%) used the ICG. The OARs whose delineations agreed best with the OARref were mandible [median DSC 0.9, range (0.8-0.9); median MSD 1.1 mm, range (0.8-8.3), median HD95 3.4 mm, range (1.5-38.7)], brainstem [median DSC 0.9 (0.6-0.9); median MSD 1.5 mm (1.1-4.0), median HD95 4.0 mm (2.3-15.0)], submandibular glands [median DSC 0.8 (0.5-0.9); median MSD 1.2 mm (0.9-2.5), median HD95 3.1 mm (1.8-12.2)] and parotids [median DSC 0.9 (0.6-0.9); median MSD 1.9 mm (1.2-4.2), median HD95 5.1 mm (3.1-19.2)]. Oral cavity, cochleas, PCMs, supraglottic larynx and glottic area showed more variation. RO who used the consensus guidelines showed significantly less IOV (p = 0.008).ConclusionsAlthough ICG for delineation of OARs in HNC exist, they are only implemented by about half of RO participating in this study, which partly explains the delineation variability. However, this study highlights that guidelines alone do not suffice to eliminate IOV and that more effort needs to be done to accomplish further treatment standardisation, for example with artificial intelligence.
| S-EPMC8240214 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Recent attention has sought to standardize hand surgery training in the United States. This study analyzes the variability in operative hand experience for orthopedic and general surgery residents. METHODS:Case logs for orthopedic and general surgery residency graduates were obtained from the American Council of Graduate Medical Education (2006-2007 to 2014-2015). Plastic surgery case logs were not available for comparison. Hand surgery case volumes were compared between specialties with parametric tests. Intraspecialty variation in orthopedic surgery was assessed between the bottom and top 10th percentiles in procedure categories. RESULTS:Case logs for 9605 general surgery residents and 5911 orthopedic surgery residents were analyzed. Orthopedic surgery residents performed a greater number of hand surgery cases than general surgery residents ( P < .001). Mean total hand experience ranged from 2.5 ± 4 to 2.8 ± 5 procedures for general surgery residents with no reported cases of soft tissue repairs, vascular repairs, and replants. Significant intraspecialty variation existed in orthopedic surgery for all hand procedure categories (range, 3.3-15.0). CONCLUSIONS:As the model for hand surgery training evolves, general surgeons may represent an underutilized talent pool to meet the critical demand for hand surgeon specialists. Future research is needed to determine acceptable levels of training variability in hand surgery.
| S-EPMC5755855 | biostudies-other
Project description:Radiomics is a method to mine large numbers of quantitative imaging features and develop predictive models. It has shown exciting promise for improved cancer decision support from early detection to personalized precision treatment, and therefore offers a desirable new direction for pancreatic cancer where the mortality remains high despite the current care and intense research. For radiomics, interobserver segmentation variability and its effect on radiomic feature stability is a crucial consideration. While investigations have been reported for high-contrast cancer sites such as lung cancer, no studies to date have investigated it on CT-based radiomics for pancreatic cancer. With three radiation oncology observers and three radiology observers independently contouring on the contrast CT of 21 pancreatic cancer patients, we conducted the first interobserver segmentation variability study on CT-based radiomics for pancreatic cancer. Moreover, our novel investigation assessed whether there exists an interdisciplinary difference between the two disciplines. For each patient, a consensus tumor volume was generated using the simultaneous truth and performance level expectation algorithm, using the dice similarity coefficient (DSC) to assess each observer's delineation against the consensus volume. Radiation oncology observers showed a higher average DSC of 0.81 ± 0.06 than the radiology observers at 0.69 ± 0.16 (p = 0.002). On a panel of 1277 radiomic features, the intraclass correlation coefficients (ICC) was calculated for all observers and those of each discipline. Large variations of ICCs were observed for different radiomic features, but ICCs were generally higher for the radiation oncology group than for the radiology group. Applying a threshold of ICC > 0.75 for considering a feature as stable, 448 features (35%) were found stable for the radiation oncology group and 214 features (16%) were stable from the radiology group. Among them, 205 features were found stable for both groups. Our results provide information for interobserver segmentation variability and its effect on CT-based radiomics for pancreatic cancer. An interesting interdisciplinary variability found in this study also introduces new considerations for the deployment of radiomics models.
| S-EPMC8357939 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionImage registration and delineation of organs at risk (OARs) are key components of three-dimensional conformal (3DCRT) and intensity-modulated radiotherapy (IMRT) treatment planning. This study hypothesized that image registration and OAR delineation are often performed by medical physicists and/or dosimetrists and are not routinely reviewed by treating physicians.MethodsAn anonymous, internet-based survey of medical physicists and dosimetrists was distributed via the MEDPHYS and MEDDOS listserv groups. Participants were asked to characterize standard practices for completion and review of OAR contouring, target volume contouring, and image registration at their institution along with their personal training in these areas and level of comfort performing these tasks. Likert-type scales are reported as Median [Interquartile range] with scores ranging from 1 = "Extremely/All of the time" to 5 = "Not at all/Never."ResultsTwo hundred and ninety-seven individuals responded to the survey. Overall, respondents indicated significantly less frequent physician review (3 [2-4] vs 2 [1-3]), and less confidence in the thoroughness of physician review (3 [2-4] vs 2 [1-3], P < 0.01) of OAR contours compared to image registration. Only 19% (95% CI 14-24%) of respondents reported a formal process by which OAR volumes are reviewed by physicians in their clinic. The presence of a formal review process was also associated with significantly higher perceived thoroughness of review of OAR volumes compared to clinics with no formal review process (2 [2-3] vs 3 [2-4], P < 0.01).ConclusionDespite the critical role of OAR delineation and image registration in the 3DCRT and IMRT treatment planning process, physician review of these tasks is not always optimal. Radiotherapy clinics should consider implementation of formal processes to promote adequate physician review of OARs and image registrations to ensure the quality and safety of radiotherapy treatment plans.
| S-EPMC7701106 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceDisparities in quality of care according to patient race and socioeconomic status persist in the US. Differential referral patterns to specialist physicians might be associated with observed disparities.ObjectiveTo examine whether differences exist between Black and White Medicare beneficiaries in the observed patterns of patient sharing between primary care physicians (PCPs) and physicians in the 6 specialties to which patients were most frequently referred.Design, setting, and participantsThis cross-sectional observational study of Black and White Medicare beneficiaries used claims data from 2009 to 2010 on 100% of traditional Medicare beneficiaries who were seen by PCPs and selected high-volume specialists in 12 health care markets with at least 10% of the population being Black. Statistical analyses were conducted from December 20, 2017, to September 30, 2020.ExposuresDifferences in patterns of patient sharing among Black and White patients.Main outcomes and measuresPrimary care physician and specialist degree (the number of other PCPs or specialists to whom each physician is connected) and strength (the number of shared patients per connection, overall, for Black patients and White patients and after equalizing the numbers of Black and White patients per PCP), as well as distance between PCP and patient and specialist zip code centroids.ResultsThe 12 selected markets ranged in size from Manhattan, New York (187 054 Black or White beneficiaries seen by at least 2 physicians within an episode of care; 9794 total physicians), to Tallahassee, Florida (44 644 Black or White beneficiaries seen by at least 2 physicians within an episode of care; 847 total physicians). The percentage of Black beneficiaries ranged from 11.5% (Huntsville, Alabama) to 46.8% (Chicago, Illinois). The mean PCP-specialist degree (number of specialists with whom a PCP shares patients) was lower for Black patients than for White patients. For instance, the mean PCP-cardiologist degree across all markets for White patients was 17.5 compared with 8.8 for Black patients. After sampling White patients to equalize the numbers of patients seen, the degree differences narrowed but were still not equivalent in many markets (eg, for all specialties in Baton Rouge, Louisiana: 4.5 for Black patients vs 5.7 for White patients). Specialist networks among White patients were much larger than those constructed based just on Black patients (eg, for cardiology across all markets: 135 for Black patients vs 330 for White patients), even after equalizing the numbers of patients seen per PCP (123 for Black patients vs 211 for White patients). The overall test for differences in referral patterns was statistically significant for all 6 specialties examined in 7 of the 12 markets and in 5 specialties for another 3.Conclusions and relevanceThis study suggests that differences exist in specialist referral patterns by race among Medicare beneficiaries. This is an observational study, and thus some differences might have resulted from patient-initiated visits to specialists.
| S-EPMC7835717 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Previous associations between surgeon volume with adrenalectomy outcomes examined only a sample of procedures. We performed an analysis of all adrenalectomies performed in New York state to assess the effect of surgeon volume and specialty on clinical outcomes. METHODS:Adrenalectomies performed in adults were identified from the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System from 2000-2014. Surgeon specialty, volume, and patient demographics were assessed. High volume was defined using a significance threshold at ?4 adrenalectomies per year. Outcome variables included in-hospital mortality, duration of stay, and in-hospital complications. RESULTS:A total of 6,054 adrenalectomies were included. Median patient age was 56 years; 41.9% were men and 68.3% were white. Urologists (n?=?462) performed 46.8% of adrenalectomies, general surgeons (n?=?599) performed 35.0%, and endocrine surgeons (n?=?23) performed 18.1%. Significantly more endocrine surgeons were high-volume compared with urologists and general surgeons (65.2% vs 10.2% and 6.7%, respectively, P?<?.001). High-volume surgeons had significantly lower mortality compared with low-volume surgeons (0.56% vs 1.25%, P?=?.004) and a lower rate of complications (10.2% vs 16.4%, P?=?<?.001). Endocrine surgeons were more likely to perform laparoscopic procedures (34.8% vs 22.4% general surgeons and 27.7% US, P?<?.001) and had the lowest median hospital duration of stay (2 days vs 4 days general surgeons and 3 days urologists, P?<?.001). After risk adjustment, low surgeon volume was an independent predictor of inpatient complications (odds ratio?=?0.96, P?=?.002). CONCLUSION:Patients with adrenal disease should be referred to surgeons based on adrenalectomy volume regardless of specialty, but most endocrine surgeons that perform adrenalectomy are high-volume for the procedure.
| S-EPMC5903575 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Strong coupling between light and matter can occur when the interaction strength between a confined electromagnetic field and a molecular resonance exceeds the losses to the environment, leading to the formation of hybrid light-matter states known as polaritons. Ultrastrong coupling occurs when the coupling strength becomes comparable to the transition energy of the system. It is widely assumed that the confined electromagnetic fields necessary for strong coupling to organic molecules can only be achieved with external structures such as Fabry-Pérot resonators, plasmonic nanostructures, or dielectric resonators. Here we show experimentally that such structures are unnecessary and that a simple dielectric film of dye molecules supports sufficiently modified vacuum electromagnetic fields to enable room-temperature ultrastrong light-matter coupling. Our results may be of use in the design of experiments to probe polaritonic chemistry and suggest that polaritonic states are perhaps easier to realize than previously thought.
| S-EPMC8327311 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe delineation of pancreatic tumors on CT is challenging. In this study, we quantified the interobserver variation for pancreatic tumor delineation on 3DCT as well as on 4DCT.MethodsEight observers (radiation oncologists) from six institutions delineated pancreatic tumors of four patients with (borderline) resectable pancreatic cancer. The study consisted of two stages. In the 3DCT-stage, the gross tumor volume (GTV) was delineated on a contrast-enhanced scan. In the 4DCT-stage, the internal GTV (iGTV) was delineated, accounting for the respiratory motion. We calculated the volumes of the (i)GTV, the overlap of the delineated volumes (expressed as generalized conformity index: CIgen), the local observer variation (local standard deviation: SD) and the overall observer variation (overall SD). We compared these results between GTVs and iGTVs. Additionally, observers were asked to fill out a questionnaire concerning the difficulty of the delineation and their experience in delineating pancreatic tumors.ResultsThe ratios of the largest to the smallest delineated GTV and iGTV within the same patient were 6.8 and 16.5, respectively. As the iGTV incorporates the GTV during all respiratory phases, the mean volumes of the iGTV (40.07 cm3) were larger than those of the GTV (29.91 cm3). For all patients, CIgen was larger for the iGTV than for the GTV. The mean overall observer variation (root-mean-square of all local SDs over four patients) was 0.63 cm and 0.80 cm for GTV and iGTV, respectively. The largest local observer variations were seen close to biliary stents and suspicious pathological enlarged lymph nodes, as some observers included them and some did not. This variation was more pronounced for the iGTV than for the GTV. The observers rated the 3DCT-stage and 4DCT-stage equally difficult and treated on average three to four pancreatic cancer patients per year.ConclusionsA considerable interobserver variation in delineation of pancreatic tumors was observed. This variation was larger for 4D than for 3D delineation. The largest local observer variation was found around biliary stents and suspicious pathological enlarged lymph nodes.
| S-EPMC5364627 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPrescription errors that occur due to the process of pill splitting are a common medication problem; however, available prescription information involving inappropriate pill splitting and its associated factors is lacking.MethodsWe retrospectively evaluated a cohort of ambulatory prescriptions involving extended-release or enteric-coated formulations in a Taiwan medical center during a 5-month period in 2010. For this study, those pill splitting prescriptions involving special oral formulations were defined as inappropriate prescriptions. Information obtained included patient demographics, prescriber specialty and prescription details, which were assessed to identify factors associated with inappropriate pill splitting.ResultsThere were 1,252 inappropriate prescriptions identified in this cohort study, representing a prescription frequency for inappropriate pill splitting of 1.0% among 124,300 prescriptions with special oral formulations. Among 35 drugs with special oral formulations in our study, 20 different drugs (57.1%, 20/35) had ever been prescribed to split. Anti-diabetic agents, cardiovascular agents and central nervous system agents were the most common drug classes involved in inappropriate splitting. The rate of inappropriate pill splitting was higher in older (over 65 years of age) patients (1.1%, 832/75,387). Eighty-seven percent (1089/1252) of inappropriate prescriptions were prescribed by internists. The rate of inappropriate pill splitting was highest from endocrinologists (3.4%, 429/12,477), nephrologists (1.3%, 81/6,028) and cardiologists (1.3%, 297/23,531). Multivariate logistic regression analysis revealed that the strongest factor associated with individual specific drug of inappropriate splitting was particular physician specialties.ConclusionThis study provides important insights into the inappropriate prescription of special oral formulation related to pill splitting, and helps to aggregate information that can assist medical professionals in creating processes for reducing inappropriate pill splitting in the future.
| S-EPMC3726493 | biostudies-literature