Literature DB >> 18037522

TomoTherapy: implications on daily workload and scheduling patients.

Paul Bijdekerke1, Dirk Verellen, Koen Tournel, Vincent Vinh-Hung, Ferdi Somers, Peggy Bieseman, Guy Storme.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to measure the mean duration of treatments and to investigate the occasional events, with extreme influence on treatment time. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Time measurements were performed from the start of patient treatments (n=72) and one year later (n=27) on TomoTherapy. The time interval of the different procedures during treatment was measured. The cause of extra long treatment time was examined. All patients received a MV-CT scan prior to treatment.
RESULTS: The mean overall total treatment time per localization ranged from 21.3 to 27.4 min. In 4.1% of the total population extreme long time measurements have been observed, interruptions due to equipment malfunction being the main cause (57.5%). Comparison between time measurements performed after clinical implementation and time measurements performed one year later to examine the learning curve, showed no differences.
CONCLUSION: Treating a patient on TomoTherapy takes approximately 25 min, yielding 19 patients to be treated within 8 h. However, occasional treatment interruptions and variations in time of irradiation have a certain impact on daily patient scheduling for treatment, and influences the workload from day-to-day.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2007        PMID: 18037522     DOI: 10.1016/j.radonc.2007.10.036

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Radiother Oncol        ISSN: 0167-8140            Impact factor:   6.280


  6 in total

1.  Feasibility of intrafraction whole-body motion tracking for total marrow irradiation.

Authors:  Manju Sharma; Troy Dos Santos; Nikolaos P Papanikolopoulos; Susanta Kumar Hui
Journal:  J Biomed Opt       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.170

2.  Image-guided radiation therapy: what is our Utopia?

Authors:  A W Beavis
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2010-03       Impact factor: 3.039

3.  IMRT and IGRT in head and neck cancer: Have we delivered what we promised?

Authors:  Gupta Tejpal; Agarwal Jaiprakash; Bannerjee Susovan; Sarbani Ghosh-Laskar; Vedang Murthy; Ashwini Budrukkar
Journal:  Indian J Surg Oncol       Date:  2010-11-21

4.  Empirical estimation of beam-on time for prostate cancer patients treated on Tomotherapy.

Authors:  Małgorzata Skórska; Tomasz Piotrowski
Journal:  Rep Pract Oncol Radiother       Date:  2013-02-04

5.  Effectiveness of tomotherapy vs linear accelerator image-guided intensity-modulated radiotherapy for localized pharyngeal cancer treated with definitive concurrent chemoradiotherapy: a Taiwanese population-based propensity score-matched analysis.

Authors:  Yao-Ching Wang; Chia-Chin Li; Chun-Ru Chien
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2018-05-17       Impact factor: 3.039

Review 6.  Clinical utility of RapidArc™ radiotherapy technology.

Authors:  Erminia Infusino
Journal:  Cancer Manag Res       Date:  2015-11-12       Impact factor: 3.989

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.