N Tselis1, U Maurer, W Popp, H Sack, N Zamboglou. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Sana Klinikum Offenbach, Starkenburgring 66, 63069, Offenbach am Main, Germany, ntselis@hotmail.com.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: The German Society of Radiation Oncology initiated a multicenter trial to evaluate core processes and subprocesses of radiotherapy by prospective evaluation of all important procedures in the most frequent malignancies treated by radiation therapy. The aim of this analysis was to assess the required resources for interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) and low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (BRT) based on actual time measurements regarding allocation of personnel and room occupation needed for specific procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two radiotherapy centers (community hospital of Offenbach am Main and community hospital of Eschweiler) participated in this prospective study. Working time of the different occupational groups and room occupancies for the workflow of prostate BRT were recorded and methodically assessed during a 3-month period. RESULTS: For HDR and LDR BRT, a total of 560 and 92 measurements, respectively, were documented. The time needed for treatment preplanning was median 24 min for HDR (n = 112 measurements) and 6 min for LDR BRT (n = 21). Catheter implantation with intraoperative HDR real-time planning (n = 112), postimplantation HDR treatment planning (n = 112), and remotely controlled HDR afterloading irradiation (n = 112) required median 25, 39, and 50 min, respectively. For LDR real-time planning (n = 39) and LDR treatment postplanning (n = 32), the assessed median duration was 91 and 11 min, respectively. Room occupancy and overall mean medical staff times were 194 and 910 min respectively, for HDR, and 113 and 371 min, respectively, for LDR BRT. CONCLUSION: In this prospective analysis, the resource requirements for the application of HDR and LDR BRT of prostate cancer were assessed methodically and are presented for first time.
RCT Entities:
INTRODUCTION: The German Society of Radiation Oncology initiated a multicenter trial to evaluate core processes and subprocesses of radiotherapy by prospective evaluation of all important procedures in the most frequent malignancies treated by radiation therapy. The aim of this analysis was to assess the required resources for interstitial high-dose-rate (HDR) and low-dose-rate (LDR) prostate brachytherapy (BRT) based on actual time measurements regarding allocation of personnel and room occupation needed for specific procedures. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Two radiotherapy centers (community hospital of Offenbach am Main and community hospital of Eschweiler) participated in this prospective study. Working time of the different occupational groups and room occupancies for the workflow of prostate BRT were recorded and methodically assessed during a 3-month period. RESULTS: For HDR and LDR BRT, a total of 560 and 92 measurements, respectively, were documented. The time needed for treatment preplanning was median 24 min for HDR (n = 112 measurements) and 6 min for LDR BRT (n = 21). Catheter implantation with intraoperative HDR real-time planning (n = 112), postimplantation HDR treatment planning (n = 112), and remotely controlled HDR afterloading irradiation (n = 112) required median 25, 39, and 50 min, respectively. For LDR real-time planning (n = 39) and LDR treatment postplanning (n = 32), the assessed median duration was 91 and 11 min, respectively. Room occupancy and overall mean medical staff times were 194 and 910 min respectively, for HDR, and 113 and 371 min, respectively, for LDR BRT. CONCLUSION: In this prospective analysis, the resource requirements for the application of HDR and LDR BRT of prostate cancer were assessed methodically and are presented for first time.
Authors: R Esco; A Palacios; J Pardo; A Biete; J A Carceller; C Veiras; G Vazquez Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2003-06-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: F Guedea; T Ellison; G Heeren; M Ventura; G François; J J Mazeron; B Cottier; J López Torrecilla; P Bilbao; M Taillet; J M Borras Journal: Clin Transl Oncol Date: 2006-07 Impact factor: 3.405
Authors: A Zabel-du Bois; S Milker-Zabel; M Henzel; W Popp; J Debus; H Sack; R Engenhart-Cabillic Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2012-08-01 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Brian J Davis; Eric M Horwitz; W Robert Lee; Juanita M Crook; Richard G Stock; Gregory S Merrick; Wayne M Butler; Peter D Grimm; Nelson N Stone; Louis Potters; Anthony L Zietman; Michael J Zelefsky Journal: Brachytherapy Date: 2012 Jan-Feb Impact factor: 2.362
Authors: Gregor Goldner; Samir Sljivic; Renee Oismueller; Johanna Salinger; Michael Mittermüller; Tanja Langsenlehner; Walter Harder; Gerhard Kametriser; Helmut Eiter; Elisabeth Nechvile Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2011-04-26 Impact factor: 3.621
Authors: Anthony V D'Amico; Richard Whittington; S Bruce Malkowicz; Kerri Cote; Marian Loffredo; Delray Schultz; Ming-Hui Chen; John E Tomaszewski; Andrew A Renshaw; Alan Wein; Jerome P Richie Journal: Cancer Date: 2002-07-15 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Razvan M Galalae; Alvaro Martinez; Tim Mate; Christina Mitchell; Gregory Edmundson; Nils Nuernberg; Stephen Eulau; Gary Gustafson; Michael Gribble; Gyoergy Kovács Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 2004-03-15 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: Michael Pinkawa; Carolin Schubert; Nuria Escobar-Corral; Richard Holy; Michael J Eble Journal: Strahlenther Onkol Date: 2014-10-23 Impact factor: 3.621