PURPOSE: To examine effects of a teaching intervention on precise delineation of the prostate and rectum during planning of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A pretest, posttest, randomized controlled group design was used. During pretest all participants contoured prostate and rectum on planning CT. Afterward, they participated in two types of workshops. The experimental group engaged in an interactive teaching session focused on prostate and rectum MR anatomy compared with CT anatomy. The control group focused on 3D-CRT planning without mention of prostate or rectal contouring. The experimental group practiced on fused MR-CT images, whereas the control group practiced on CT images. All participants completed the posttest. RESULTS:Thirty-one trainees (12 male, 19 female) were randomly assigned to two groups, 17 in the experimental arm, and 14 in the control group. Seventeen felt familiar or very familiar with pelvic organ contouring, 12 somewhat, and 2 had never done it. Thirteen felt confident with organ contouring, 13 somewhat, and 5 not confident. The demographics and composition of groups were analyzed with chi(2) and repeated-measures analysis of variance with the two groups (experimental or control) and two tests (pre- or posttest) as factors. Satisfaction with the course and long-term effects of the course on practice were assessed with immediate and delayed surveys. All performance variables showed a similar pattern of results. CONCLUSIONS: The training sessions improved the technical performance similarly in both groups. Participants were satisfied with the course content, and the delayed survey reflected that cognitively participants felt more confident with prostate and rectum contouring and would investigate opportunities to learn more about organ contouring. Crown Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: To examine effects of a teaching intervention on precise delineation of the prostate and rectum during planning of three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy (3D-CRT) for prostate cancer. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A pretest, posttest, randomized controlled group design was used. During pretest all participants contoured prostate and rectum on planning CT. Afterward, they participated in two types of workshops. The experimental group engaged in an interactive teaching session focused on prostate and rectum MR anatomy compared with CT anatomy. The control group focused on 3D-CRT planning without mention of prostate or rectal contouring. The experimental group practiced on fused MR-CT images, whereas the control group practiced on CT images. All participants completed the posttest. RESULTS: Thirty-one trainees (12 male, 19 female) were randomly assigned to two groups, 17 in the experimental arm, and 14 in the control group. Seventeen felt familiar or very familiar with pelvic organ contouring, 12 somewhat, and 2 had never done it. Thirteen felt confident with organ contouring, 13 somewhat, and 5 not confident. The demographics and composition of groups were analyzed with chi(2) and repeated-measures analysis of variance with the two groups (experimental or control) and two tests (pre- or posttest) as factors. Satisfaction with the course and long-term effects of the course on practice were assessed with immediate and delayed surveys. All performance variables showed a similar pattern of results. CONCLUSIONS: The training sessions improved the technical performance similarly in both groups. Participants were satisfied with the course content, and the delayed survey reflected that cognitively participants felt more confident with prostate and rectum contouring and would investigate opportunities to learn more about organ contouring. Crown Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Authors: B A Jereczek-Fossa; C Pobbiati; L Santoro; C Fodor; P Fanti; S Vigorito; G Baroni; D Zerini; O De Cobelli; R Orecchia Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2013-08-17 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: S Gwynne; E Spezi; D Sebag-Montefiore; S Mukherjee; E Miles; J Conibear; J Staffurth Journal: Br J Radiol Date: 2013-02-07 Impact factor: 3.039
Authors: Michael K Rooney; Fan Zhu; Erin F Gillespie; Jillian R Gunther; Ryan P McKillip; Matthew Lineberry; Ara Tekian; Daniel W Golden Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2018-06-06 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Jillian R Gunther; Stanley L Liauw; Seungtaek Choi; Abdallah S R Mohamed; Nikhil G Thaker; Clifton D Fuller; Christopher J Stepaniak; Prajnan Das; Daniel W Golden Journal: J Am Coll Radiol Date: 2016-05-18 Impact factor: 5.532
Authors: David Pasquier; Laurence Boutaud de la Combe-Chossiere; Damien Carlier; Franck Darloy; Anne Catherine Degrendel-Courtecuisse; Chantal Dufour; Mustapha Fares; Laurent Gilbeau; Xavier Liem; Philippe Martin; Pascal Meyer; Jean François Minne; Olimpia Olszyk; Hassan Rhliouch; Marc Tokarski; Chloé Viot; Bernard Castelain; Eric Lartigau Journal: PLoS One Date: 2016-03-17 Impact factor: 3.240