Patricia Lucey1, Christos Zouzias1, Loren Franco1, Sravana K Chennupati2, Shalom Kalnicki3, Beth N McLellan4. 1. Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, Diablo Valley Oncology and Hematology Medical Group, Pleasant Hill, CA, USA. 3. Department of Radiation Oncology, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA. 4. Division of Dermatology, Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, New York, USA. bethnmclellan@gmail.com.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Due to the inconclusive evidence for available treatment options, management of radiation dermatitis (RD) varies among practitioners. This study defines and reviews the current treatment patterns for RD in the USA, providing guidance for practicing physicians as well as directions for future research. METHODS: An online survey of 21 questions was emailed to all 5626 members of the 2013 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) directory, which included radiation oncologists, residents, fellows, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, registered nurses and other care providers. The questions were designed to evaluate demographics of responders, their training and comfort in the management RD, and their patterns of care regarding prophylaxis and treatment of RD. Data was analyzed using simple summary and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Out of the 5626 emails sent, we were left with 709 physician respondents for our analysis, or a response rate of 12.9%. Although 84.7% of physicians felt that RD had a moderate or large impact on patients' quality of life during cancer treatment, only 30.1% received special training or specific instructional courses in treating RD during their medical training in residency or fellowship. Eighty-nine percent of surveyed physicians rely on observational and/or anecdotal findings to guide treatment decisions, and 51.4% reported using evidence-based treatments. CONCLUSION: The results of our study show that there is great variability in the topical agents and dressings used in practice by radiation oncologists to prevent and treat RD. This information may be useful to other practitioners to develop their own personal recommendations and can guide further research into strategies to prevent and treat radiation dermatitis.
PURPOSE: Due to the inconclusive evidence for available treatment options, management of radiation dermatitis (RD) varies among practitioners. This study defines and reviews the current treatment patterns for RD in the USA, providing guidance for practicing physicians as well as directions for future research. METHODS: An online survey of 21 questions was emailed to all 5626 members of the 2013 American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) directory, which included radiation oncologists, residents, fellows, physician assistants, nurse practitioners, registered nurses and other care providers. The questions were designed to evaluate demographics of responders, their training and comfort in the management RD, and their patterns of care regarding prophylaxis and treatment of RD. Data was analyzed using simple summary and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Out of the 5626 emails sent, we were left with 709 physician respondents for our analysis, or a response rate of 12.9%. Although 84.7% of physicians felt that RD had a moderate or large impact on patients' quality of life during cancer treatment, only 30.1% received special training or specific instructional courses in treating RD during their medical training in residency or fellowship. Eighty-nine percent of surveyed physicians rely on observational and/or anecdotal findings to guide treatment decisions, and 51.4% reported using evidence-based treatments. CONCLUSION: The results of our study show that there is great variability in the topical agents and dressings used in practice by radiation oncologists to prevent and treat RD. This information may be useful to other practitioners to develop their own personal recommendations and can guide further research into strategies to prevent and treat radiation dermatitis.
Authors: Sue Heggie; Guy P Bryant; Lee Tripcony; Jacqui Keller; Pauline Rose; Mary Glendenning; Jenny Heath Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2002-12 Impact factor: 2.592
Authors: Rebecca K S Wong; René-Jean Bensadoun; Christine B Boers-Doets; Jane Bryce; Alexandre Chan; Joel B Epstein; Beth Eaby-Sandy; Mario E Lacouture Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2013-08-14 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: M S Williams; M Burk; C L Loprinzi; M Hill; P J Schomberg; K Nearhood; J R O'Fallon; J A Laurie; T G Shanahan; R L Moore; R E Urias; R R Kuske; R E Engel; W D Eggleston Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Date: 1996-09-01 Impact factor: 7.038
Authors: N Salvo; E Barnes; J van Draanen; E Stacey; G Mitera; D Breen; A Giotis; G Czarnota; J Pang; C De Angelis Journal: Curr Oncol Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 3.677
Authors: Julie Ryan Wolf; Jennifer S Gewandter; Javier Bautista; Charles E Heckler; Jon Strasser; Pawal Dyk; Thomas Anderson; Howard Gross; Tod Speer; Lindsey Dolohanty; Kevin Bylund; Alice P Pentland; Gary R Morrow Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2019-11-22 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Samuel Finkelstein; Lauren Kanee; Tara Behroozian; Julie Ryan Wolf; Corina van den Hurk; Edward Chow; Pierluigi Bonomo Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-01-24 Impact factor: 3.603