Emily J Martin1, Joshua A Jones2. 1. Department of Medicine, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California. 2. Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
Abstract
Background: Educational deficiencies among hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) physicians contribute to suboptimal utilization of palliative radiotherapy (PRT) for patients with advanced cancer. Objective: To survey HPM fellowship program directors regarding the need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. Design: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of HPM fellowship program directors in June 2018. We used a 5-point Likert-type scale to assess agreement with statements related to PRT education. Setting/Subjects: Program directors for all United States Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited HPM fellowship programs with at least one enrolled fellow at the time of survey distribution were included. Results: Eighty-one of 120 eligible program directors completed the survey (68% response rate). Nearly all of the respondents agreed that HPM physicians should possess a working knowledge of PRT and that the principles of PRT should be formally taught in HPM fellowship. Thirty percent of HPM fellowship programs, however, lacked a PRT curriculum and only 14% of programs provided more than two hours of PRT education. Limited didactic time, lack of interest among fellows, and lack of collaboration with radiation oncologists were not perceived to be significant barriers to incorporating PRT education into HPM fellowship. More than 75% of program directors indicated that they would consider implementing a PRT curriculum designed specifically for HPM physicians if one were available. Conclusion: There is a need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. This need may be best addressed by developing a widely accessible PRT curriculum designed to meet the needs of HPM physicians.
Background: Educational deficiencies among hospice and palliative medicine (HPM) physicians contribute to suboptimal utilization of palliative radiotherapy (PRT) for patients with advanced cancer. Objective: To survey HPM fellowship program directors regarding the need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. Design: We conducted a cross-sectional survey of HPM fellowship program directors in June 2018. We used a 5-point Likert-type scale to assess agreement with statements related to PRT education. Setting/Subjects: Program directors for all United States Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education-accredited HPM fellowship programs with at least one enrolled fellow at the time of survey distribution were included. Results: Eighty-one of 120 eligible program directors completed the survey (68% response rate). Nearly all of the respondents agreed that HPM physicians should possess a working knowledge of PRT and that the principles of PRT should be formally taught in HPM fellowship. Thirty percent of HPM fellowship programs, however, lacked a PRT curriculum and only 14% of programs provided more than two hours of PRT education. Limited didactic time, lack of interest among fellows, and lack of collaboration with radiation oncologists were not perceived to be significant barriers to incorporating PRT education into HPM fellowship. More than 75% of program directors indicated that they would consider implementing a PRT curriculum designed specifically for HPM physicians if one were available. Conclusion: There is a need for PRT education in HPM fellowship. This need may be best addressed by developing a widely accessible PRT curriculum designed to meet the needs of HPM physicians.
Entities:
Keywords:
cancer; medical education; palliative care; palliative radiation; program directors; radiation oncology