Surbhi Grover1, Manjeet Chadha2, Ramesh Rengan3, Tim R Williams4, Zachary S Morris5, David A L Morgan6, Prabhakar Tripuraneni7, Kenneth Hu8, Akila N Viswanathan9. 1. Department of Radiation Oncology, Perelman School of Medicine, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Electronic address: Surbhi.grover@uphs.upenn.edu. 2. Mount Sinai Beth Israel Health System, Icahn School of Medicine, New York, New York. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington. 4. Department of Radiation Oncology, Lynn Cancer Institute, Boca Raton Regional Hospital, Boca Raton, Florida. 5. Department of Human Oncology, University of Wisconsin School of Medicine and Public Health, Seattle, Washington. 6. Breast Services, Sherwood Forest Hospitals NHS Trust, Nottinghamshire, United Kingdom. 7. Department of Radiation Oncology, Scripps Green Hospital, La Jolla, California. 8. Department of Radiation Oncology, NYU Lagone Medical Center, New York, New York. 9. Department of Radiation Oncology, Brigham and Women's Hospital/Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Boston, Massachusetts.
Abstract
PURPOSE: To conduct a survey of radiation oncologists in India, to better understand specific educational needs of radiation oncology in India and define areas of collaboration with US institutions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 20-question survey was distributed to members of the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the Indian Brachytherapy Society between November 2013 and May 2014. RESULTS: We received a total of 132 responses. Over 50% of the physicians treat more than 200 patients per day, use 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional treatment planning techniques, and approximately 50% use image guided techniques. For education needs, most respondents agreed that further education in intensity modulated radiation therapy, image guided radiation therapy, stereotactic radiation therapy, biostatistics, and research methods for medical residents would be useful areas of collaboration with institutions in the United States. Other areas of collaboration include developing a structured training module for nursing, physics training, and developing a second-opinion clinic for difficult cases with faculty in the United States. CONCLUSION: Various areas of potential collaboration in radiation oncology education were identified through this survey. These include the following: establishing education programs focused on current technology, facilitating exchange programs for trainees in India to the United States, promoting training in research methods, establishing training modules for physicists and oncology nurses, and creating an Indo-US. Tumor Board. It would require collaboration between the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the American Society for Radiation Oncology to develop these educational initiatives.
PURPOSE: To conduct a survey of radiation oncologists in India, to better understand specific educational needs of radiation oncology in India and define areas of collaboration with US institutions. METHODS AND MATERIALS: A 20-question survey was distributed to members of the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the Indian Brachytherapy Society between November 2013 and May 2014. RESULTS: We received a total of 132 responses. Over 50% of the physicians treat more than 200 patients per day, use 2-dimensional or 3-dimensional treatment planning techniques, and approximately 50% use image guided techniques. For education needs, most respondents agreed that further education in intensity modulated radiation therapy, image guided radiation therapy, stereotactic radiation therapy, biostatistics, and research methods for medical residents would be useful areas of collaboration with institutions in the United States. Other areas of collaboration include developing a structured training module for nursing, physics training, and developing a second-opinion clinic for difficult cases with faculty in the United States. CONCLUSION: Various areas of potential collaboration in radiation oncology education were identified through this survey. These include the following: establishing education programs focused on current technology, facilitating exchange programs for trainees in India to the United States, promoting training in research methods, establishing training modules for physicists and oncology nurses, and creating an Indo-US. Tumor Board. It would require collaboration between the Association of Indian Radiation Oncologists and the American Society for Radiation Oncology to develop these educational initiatives.