Literature DB >> 18406928

Quality assurance needs for modern image-based radiotherapy: recommendations from 2007 interorganizational symposium on "quality assurance of radiation therapy: challenges of advanced technology".

Jeffrey F Williamson1, Peter B Dunscombe, Michael B Sharpe, Bruce R Thomadsen, James A Purdy, James A Deye.   

Abstract

This report summarizes the consensus findings and recommendations emerging from 2007 Symposium, "Quality Assurance of Radiation Therapy: Challenges of Advanced Technology." The Symposium was held in Dallas February 20-22, 2007. The 3-day program, which was sponsored jointly by the American Society for Therapeutic Radiology and Oncology (ASTRO), American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM), and National Cancer Institute (NCI), included >40 invited speakers from the radiation oncology and industrial engineering/human factor communities and attracted nearly 350 attendees, mostly medical physicists. A summary of the major findings follows. The current process of developing consensus recommendations for prescriptive quality assurance (QA) tests remains valid for many of the devices and software systems used in modern radiotherapy (RT), although for some technologies, QA guidance is incomplete or out of date. The current approach to QA does not seem feasible for image-based planning, image-guided therapies, or computer-controlled therapy. In these areas, additional scientific investigation and innovative approaches are needed to manage risk and mitigate errors, including a better balance between mitigating the risk of catastrophic error and maintaining treatment quality, complimenting the current device-centered QA perspective by a more process-centered approach, and broadening community participation in QA guidance formulation and implementation. Industrial engineers and human factor experts can make significant contributions toward advancing a broader, more process-oriented, risk-based formulation of RT QA. Healthcare administrators need to appropriately increase personnel and ancillary equipment resources, as well as capital resources, when new advanced technology RT modalities are implemented. The pace of formalizing clinical physics training must rapidly increase to provide an adequately trained physics workforce for advanced technology RT. The specific recommendations of the Symposium included the following. First, the AAPM, in cooperation with other advisory bodies, should undertake a systematic program to update conventional QA guidance using available risk-assessment methods. Second, the AAPM advanced technology RT Task Groups should better balance clinical process vs. device operation aspects--encouraging greater levels of multidisciplinary participation such as industrial engineering consultants and use-risk assessment and process-flow techniques. Third, ASTRO should form a multidisciplinary subcommittee, consisting of physician, physicist, vendor, and industrial engineering representatives, to better address modern RT quality management and QA needs. Finally, government and private entities committed to improved healthcare quality and safety should support research directed toward addressing QA problems in image-guided therapies.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2008        PMID: 18406928     DOI: 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2007.08.080

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys        ISSN: 0360-3016            Impact factor:   7.038


  18 in total

1.  Safety strategies in an academic radiation oncology department and recommendations for action.

Authors:  Stephanie A Terezakis; Peter Pronovost; Kendra Harris; Theodore Deweese; Eric Ford
Journal:  Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf       Date:  2011-07

Review 2.  Radiotherapy protocol deviations and clinical outcomes: a meta-analysis of cooperative group clinical trials.

Authors:  Nitin Ohri; Xinglei Shen; Adam P Dicker; Laura A Doyle; Amy S Harrison; Timothy N Showalter
Journal:  J Natl Cancer Inst       Date:  2013-03-06       Impact factor: 13.506

3.  Process-based quality management for clinical implementation of adaptive radiotherapy.

Authors:  Camille E Noel; Lakshmi Santanam; Parag J Parikh; Sasa Mutic
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2014-08       Impact factor: 4.071

4.  The report of Task Group 100 of the AAPM: Application of risk analysis methods to radiation therapy quality management.

Authors:  M Saiful Huq; Benedick A Fraass; Peter B Dunscombe; John P Gibbons; Geoffrey S Ibbott; Arno J Mundt; Sasa Mutic; Jatinder R Palta; Frank Rath; Bruce R Thomadsen; Jeffrey F Williamson; Ellen D Yorke
Journal:  Med Phys       Date:  2016-07       Impact factor: 4.071

Review 5.  Interventional oncology in multidisciplinary cancer treatment in the 21(st) century.

Authors:  Andreas Adam; Lizbeth M Kenny
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2014-12-02       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Prospective Qualitative and Quantitative Analysis of Real-Time Peer Review Quality Assurance Rounds Incorporating Direct Physical Examination for Head and Neck Cancer Radiation Therapy.

Authors:  Carlos E Cardenas; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Randa Tao; Andrew J R Wong; Mussadiq J Awan; Shirly Kuruvila; Michalis Aristophanous; G Brandon Gunn; Jack Phan; Beth M Beadle; Steven J Frank; Adam S Garden; William H Morrison; Clifton D Fuller; David I Rosenthal
Journal:  Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys       Date:  2016-11-19       Impact factor: 7.038

Review 7.  What we have learned: the impact of quality from a clinical trials perspective.

Authors:  Thomas J FitzGerald
Journal:  Semin Radiat Oncol       Date:  2012-01       Impact factor: 5.934

8.  A survey of the practice and management of radiotherapy linear accelerator quality control in the UK.

Authors:  A Palmer; J Kearton; O Hayman
Journal:  Br J Radiol       Date:  2012-06-06       Impact factor: 3.039

9.  Keeping an eye on the ring: COMS plaque loading optimization for improved dose conformity and homogeneity.

Authors:  Nolan L Gagne; Daniel R Cutright; Mark J Rivard
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2012-09-29

10.  Physics-aspects of dose accuracy in high dose rate (HDR) brachytherapy: source dosimetry, treatment planning, equipment performance and in vivo verification techniques.

Authors:  Antony Palmer; David Bradley; Andrew Nisbet
Journal:  J Contemp Brachytherapy       Date:  2012-06-30
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.