Eduardo Rosenblatt1, Elena Fidarova2, Sunita Ghosh3, Eduardo Zubizarreta2, Olga Unterkirhere2, Natalia Semikoz4, Valery Sinaika5, Viktor Kim6, Nerses Karamyan7, Isa Isayev8, Kamal Akbarov8, Darejan Lomidze9, Oksana Bondareva10, Piotr Tuzlucov11, Manzura Zardodkhonova12, Sergey Tkachev13, Marina Kislyakova14, Jamshid Alimov15, Tetiana Pidlubna16, Michael Barton17, William Mackillop18. 1. Div. of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria. Electronic address: rosenblatt21@gmail.com. 2. Div. of Human Health, International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna, Austria. 3. Cancer Biostatistics, Univ. of Alberta, Edmonton, Canada. 4. G.V. Bondar Republican Cancer Center, Donetsk, Ukraine. 5. N.N. Alexandrov National Cancer Center of Belarus, Minsk, Belarus. 6. Kazakhstan Research Institute of Oncology and Radiology, Almaty, Kazakhstan. 7. National Center of Oncology, Yerevan, Armenia. 8. National Center of Oncology, Baku, Azerbaijan. 9. Tbilisi State Medical University, HTMC, University Clinic, Tbilisi, Georgia. 10. National Centre of Oncology, Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan. 11. Oncology Institute Chisinau, Republic of Moldova. 12. Republican Clinical Oncology Centre, Dushanbe, Tajikistan. 13. N.N. Blokhin National Medical Research Center of Oncology, Russian Federation. 14. Association of Medical Physicists in Russia, Russian Federation. 15. National Research Center of Oncology, Tashkent, Uzbekistan. 16. Clinical Hospital Feofaniya, Kyiv, Ukraine. 17. Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, UNSW, Sydney, Australia. 18. Queen's University, Division of Cancer Care & Epidemiology, Kingston, Ontario, Canada.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The quality of radiotherapy services in post-Soviet countries has not yet been studied following a formal methodology. The IAEA conducted a survey using two sets of validated radiation oncology quality indicators (ROIs). METHODS: Eleven post-Soviet countries were assessed. A coordinator was designated for each country and acted as the liaison between the country and the IAEA. The methodology was a one-time cross-sectional survey using a 58-question tool in Russian. The questionnaire was based on two validated sets of ROIs: for radiotherapy centres, the indicators proposed by Cionini et al., and for data at the country level, the Australasian ROIs. RESULTS: The overall response ratio was 66.3%, but for the Russian Federation, it was 24%. Data were updated on radiotherapy infrastructure and equipment. 256 radiotherapy centres are operating 275 linear accelerators and 337 Cobalt-60 units. 61% of teletherapy machines are older than ten years. Analysis of ROIs revealed significant differences between these countries and radiotherapy practices in the West. Naming, task profile and education programmes of radiotherapy professionals are different than in the West. CONCLUSIONS: Most countries need modernization of their radiotherapy infrastructure coupled with adequate staffing numbers and updated education programmes focusing on evidence-based medicine, quality, and safety.
BACKGROUND: The quality of radiotherapy services in post-Soviet countries has not yet been studied following a formal methodology. The IAEA conducted a survey using two sets of validated radiation oncology quality indicators (ROIs). METHODS: Eleven post-Soviet countries were assessed. A coordinator was designated for each country and acted as the liaison between the country and the IAEA. The methodology was a one-time cross-sectional survey using a 58-question tool in Russian. The questionnaire was based on two validated sets of ROIs: for radiotherapy centres, the indicators proposed by Cionini et al., and for data at the country level, the Australasian ROIs. RESULTS: The overall response ratio was 66.3%, but for the Russian Federation, it was 24%. Data were updated on radiotherapy infrastructure and equipment. 256 radiotherapy centres are operating 275 linear accelerators and 337 Cobalt-60 units. 61% of teletherapy machines are older than ten years. Analysis of ROIs revealed significant differences between these countries and radiotherapy practices in the West. Naming, task profile and education programmes of radiotherapy professionals are different than in the West. CONCLUSIONS: Most countries need modernization of their radiotherapy infrastructure coupled with adequate staffing numbers and updated education programmes focusing on evidence-based medicine, quality, and safety.