Dataset Information

A survey of surface imaging use in radiation oncology in the United States.

ABSTRACT: Surface imaging (SI) has been rapidly integrated into radiotherapy clinics across the country without specific guidelines and recommendations on its commissioning and use aside from vendor-provided information. A survey was created under the auspices of AAPM TG-302 to assess the current status of SI to identify if there is need for formal guidance. The survey was designed to determine the institutional setting of responders, availability and length of its use, commissioning procedures, and clinical applications. This survey was created in REDCap, and approved as IRB exempt to collect anonymized data. Questions were reviewed by multiple physicists to ensure concept validity and piloted by a small group of independent physicists to ensure process validity. All full members of AAPM self-identified as "therapy" or "other" were sent the survey link by email. The survey was active from February to March 2018. Of 3677 members successfully contacted, 439 completed responses; the summary of these responses provides insight on current surface imaging clinical practices, though they should not be assumed to be representative of radiation oncology as a whole. Results showed that 53.3% of respondents have SI in their clinics, mostly in treatment rooms, rarely in simulation rooms. Half of those without SI plan on purchasing it within 3 years. Over 10% have SI but do not use it clinically, 36.8% classify themselves as "expert" users, and 85.5% agreed/strongly agreed that SI guidelines are needed. Initial positioning with SI is most common for breast/chestwall and SRS/SBRT treatments, least common for pediatrics. Use of SI for intra-fraction monitoring follows a similar distribution. Gating with SI is most prevalent for breast/chestwall (66.0%) but also used in SBRT (33.0%), and non-SBRT lung/abdomen (<30%) treatments. SI is a rapidly growing technology in the field with widespread use for several anatomic sites. Guidelines and recommendations on commissioning and clinical use are warranted.

SUBMITTER: Padilla L

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6909172 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A survey of surface imaging use in radiation oncology in the United States.

Padilla Laura L Havnen-Smith Amanda A Cerviño Laura L Al-Hallaq Hania A HA

Journal of applied clinical medical physics 20191119 12

Surface imaging (SI) has been rapidly integrated into radiotherapy clinics across the country without specific guidelines and recommendations on its commissioning and use aside from vendor-provided information. A survey was created under the auspices of AAPM TG-302 to assess the current status of SI to identify if there is need for formal guidance. The survey was designed to determine the institutional setting of responders, availability and length of its use, commissioning procedures, and clini ...[more]

PMID: 31743588

Similar Datasets

Project description:PurposeWe aimed to assess perceptions of, and training regarding, the publishing process among US radiation oncology (RO) residents, focusing on awareness and understanding of criteria for selecting appropriate and legitimate peer-reviewed journals for academic publishing. The growing challenge of predatory publication in the broader scientific realm and its relevancy to resident training is also briefly discussed.Methods and materialsA survey was opened to residents of all Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited RO programs in the United States, focusing on 3 categories: (1) demographics; (2) submission, peer review, and publication of academic research; and (3) subjective ranking of factors for choosing an appropriate publisher/journal. Results were stratified by level of training and number of publications.ResultsOverall, 150 of 690 residents (19.8%) responded, with a 98% (147 of 150) completion rate. Twenty of 150 residents (13.3%) reported formal training in manuscript preparation and choosing academic journals. Only 3.4% of residents reported departmental guidelines regarding publication in "predatory" journals; 57.7% were unsure. The 3 most important factors influencing publisher and journal choice were impact factor (ranked first for 59.0%), whether a journal is found in a major index (ranked first for 18.0%), and association with a reputable organization (ranked first for 17.0%). Importance of impact factor increased with number of publications (50% with 0 publications, 48.3% with 1-5, 63.9% with 5-10, 76.2% with 10-15, and 70.6% with >15). Cost considerations influenced journal choice at least once for 79 (52.7%) residents.ConclusionsImpact factor was the most important consideration for residents when choosing an appropriate publisher, with increased emphasis with increasing number of publications. A minority had formal training in choosing appropriate academic journals and knowing how to identify so-called predatory journals or were aware if their department has proscriptions regarding publication in such journals. Additional emphasis on formal training for RO residents in manuscript preparation and choosing academic journals is warranted.

Project description:PurposeRadiation oncologists are frequently involved in providing palliative and supportive care (PSC) for patients with advanced cancers through delivery of palliative radiation. Whether they are confident in their ability to assess and initiate treatments for pain, nonpain, and psychosocial distress is unknown. The American Society for Radiation Oncology surveyed its practicing members in the United States on self-assessment of their primary PSC skills and access to continuing medical education on PSC.MethodsWe electronically surveyed 4093 practicing radiation oncologists in the United States. The survey consisted of 16-questions in 5 sections1: demographics,2 PSC training,3 domains of PSC,4 perceived barriers as a radiation oncologist to initiate advanced care planning, and5 discussion of prognosis.ResultsThe survey was e-mailed to 4093 American Society for Radiation Oncology members, and 649 responses were received (response rate 16%). The majority (91%) of radiation oncologists surveyed believe PSC is an important competency for radiation oncologists. Most radiation oncologists reported that they are moderately confident in their ability to assess and manage pain and gastrointestinal symptoms, but less confident in their ability to manage anorexia, anxiety, and depression. Despite areas of decreased confidence, a large number (42%) of radiation oncologists do not receive any additional PSC education beyond their residency training. Lastly, a perceived fear of upsetting referring medical oncologists and lack of clinic time are concerns for radiation oncologists who may want to initiate goals of care/advance care planning discussions with patients and their families.ConclusionRadiation oncologists are more confident in their ability to assess and manage pain than in their ability to manage depression, anxiety, anorexia, and fatigue. There is a need for increasing continuing medical educational efforts in PSC for practicing radiation oncologists, and strengthening PSC training in residency programs.

Project description:To document the penetration of clinical trial results, practice guidelines, and appropriateness criteria into national practice, we compared the use of components of staging and treatment for lung cancer among patients treated in 2006-2007 with those used in patients treated in 1998-1999.Patient, staging work-up, and treatment characteristics were extracted from the process survey database of the Quality Research in Radiation Oncology (QRRO), consisting of records of 340 patients with locally advanced non-small cell lung cancer (LA-NSCLC) at 44 institutions and of 144 patients with limited-stage small cell lung cancer (LS-SCLC) at 39 institutions. Data were compared for patients treated in 2006-2007 versus those for patients treated in 1998-1999.Use of all recommended procedures for staging and treatment was more common in 2006-2007. Specifically, disease was staged with brain imaging (magnetic resonance imaging or computed tomography) and whole-body imaging (positron emission tomography or bone scanning) in 66% of patients with LA-NSCLC in 2006-2007 (vs 42% in 1998-1999, P=.0001) and in 84% of patients with LS-SCLC in 2006-2007 (vs 58.3% in 1998-1999, P=.0011). Concurrent chemoradiation was used for 77% of LA-NSCLC patients (vs 45% in 1998-1999, P<.0001) and for 90% of LS-SCLC patients (vs 62.5% in 1998-1999, P<.0001). Use of the recommended radiation dose (59-74 Gy for NSCLC and 60-70 Gy as once-daily therapy for SCLC) did not change appreciably, being 88% for NSCLC in both periods and 51% (2006-2007) versus 43% (1998-1999) for SCLC. Twice-daily radiation for SCLC was used for 21% of patients in 2006-2007 versus 8% in 1998-1999. Finally, 49% of patients with LS-SCLC received prophylactic cranial irradiation (PCI) in 2006-2007 (vs 21% in 1998-1999).Although adherence to all quality indicators improved over time, brain imaging and recommended radiation doses for stage III NSCLC were used in <90% of cases. Use of full thoracic doses and PCI for LS-SCLC also requires improvement.

Project description:PurposeBlack physicians remain disproportionately underrepresented in certain medical specialties, yet comprehensive assessments in radiation oncology (RO) are lacking. Our purpose was to report current and historical representation trends for Black physicians in the US RO workforce.Methods and materialsPublic registries were used to assess significant differences in 2016 representation for US vs RO Black academic full-time faculty, residents, and applicants. Historical changes from 1970 to 2016 were reported descriptively. Linear regression was used to assess significant changes for Black residents and faculty from 1995 to 2016.ResultsIn 2016, Black people represented 3.2% vs 1.5% (P < .001), 5.6% vs 3.2% (P = .005), and 6.5% vs 5.4% (P = .352) of US vs RO faculty, residents, and applicants, respectively. Although RO residents nearly doubled from 374 (1974) to 720 (2016), Black residents peaked at 31 in 1984 (5.9%; 31 of 522) and fell to 23 (3.2%; 23 of 720) in 2016 across 91 accredited programs; Black US graduate medical education trainees nearly doubled over the same period: 3506 (1984) to 6905 (2016). From 1995 to 2016, Black US resident representation significantly increased by 0.03%/y, but decreased significantly in RO by -0.20%/y before 2006 and did not change significantly thereafter. Over the same period, Black US faculty representation significantly increased by 0.02%/y, whereas Black RO faculty significantly increased by 0.07%/y before 2006, then decreased significantly by -0.16%/y thereafter. The number of Black RO faculty peaked at 37 in 2006 (3.1%; 37 of 1203) and was 27 (1.5%; 27 of 1769) in 2016, despite the nearly 1.5-fold increase in the number of both RO faculty and Black US faculty overall (4169 in 2006 and 6047 in 2016) during that period.ConclusionsBlack physicians remain disproportionately underrepresented in RO despite an increasing available pipeline in the US physician workforce. Deliberate efforts to understand barriers to specialty training and inclusion, along with evidence-based targeted interventions to overcome them, are needed to ensure diversification of the RO physician workforce.

Dataset Information

A survey of surface imaging use in radiation oncology in the United States.

Publications

A survey of surface imaging use in radiation oncology in the United States.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets