Jon Cacicedo1, Arturo Navarro-Martin2, Susana Gonzalez-Larragan3, Berardino De Bari4, Ahmed Salem5, Max Dahele6. 1. Radiation Oncology Department, Cruces University Hospital, Osakidetza/Biocruces Health Research Institute/Department of Surgery, Radiology and Physical Medicine of the University of the Basque Country (UPV/EHU), Barakaldo, Spain. Electronic address: jon.cacicedofernandezbobadilla@osakidetza.eus. 2. Radiation Oncology Department, Hospital Duran i Reynals (ICO) Avda, Gran VIa de ĹHospitalet, Barcelona, Spain. Electronic address: anavarro@iconcologia.net. 3. Department of Health Science Library, Cruces University Hospital, Osakidetza, Barakaldo, Spain. Electronic address: susana.gonzalezlarragan@osakidetza.eus. 4. Radiation Oncology Department, Centre Hospitalier Régional Universitaire Jean Minjoz, INSERM U1098 EFS/BFC, Besançon, France. Electronic address: bdebari@chu-besancon.fr. 5. Division of Cancer Sciences, University of Manchester, United Kingdom; Department of Clinical Oncology, The Christie Hospital NHS Trust, Manchester, United Kingdom. Electronic address: ahmed.salem@manchester.ac.uk. 6. Department of Radiation Oncology, Cancer Center Amsterdam, Amsterdam UMC (VUmc location), the Netherlands. Electronic address: m.dahele@vumc.nl.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Contouring is a critical step in the radiotherapy process, but there is limited research on how to teach it and no consensus about the best method. We summarize the current evidence regarding improvement of contouring skills. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Comprehensive literature search of the Pubmed-MEDLINE database, EMBASE database and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies (independently examined by two investigators) that included baseline contouring followed by a re-contouring assessment after an educational intervention. RESULTS: 598 papers were identified. 16 studies met the inclusion criteria representing 370 participants (average number of participants per study of 23; range (4-141). Regarding the teaching methodology, 5/16 used onsite courses, 8/16 online courses, and 2/16 used blended learning. Study quality was heterogenous. There were only 3 randomized studies and only 3 analyzed the dosimetric impact of improving contouring homogeneity. Dice similarity coefficient was the most common evaluation metric (7/16), and in all these studies at least some contours improved significantly post-intervention. The time frame for evaluating the learning effect of the teaching intervention was almost exclusively short-time, with only one study evaluating the long-term utility of the educational program beyond 6 months. CONCLUSION: The literature on educational interventions designed to improve contouring performance is limited and heterogenous. Onsite, online and blended learning courses have all been shown to be helpful, however, sample sizes are small and impact assessment is almost exclusively short-term and typically does not take into account the effect on treatment planning. The most effective teaching methodology/format is unknown and impact on daily clinical practice is uncertain.
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Contouring is a critical step in the radiotherapy process, but there is limited research on how to teach it and no consensus about the best method. We summarize the current evidence regarding improvement of contouring skills. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Comprehensive literature search of the Pubmed-MEDLINE database, EMBASE database and Cochrane Library to identify relevant studies (independently examined by two investigators) that included baseline contouring followed by a re-contouring assessment after an educational intervention. RESULTS: 598 papers were identified. 16 studies met the inclusion criteria representing 370 participants (average number of participants per study of 23; range (4-141). Regarding the teaching methodology, 5/16 used onsite courses, 8/16 online courses, and 2/16 used blended learning. Study quality was heterogenous. There were only 3 randomized studies and only 3 analyzed the dosimetric impact of improving contouring homogeneity. Dice similarity coefficient was the most common evaluation metric (7/16), and in all these studies at least some contours improved significantly post-intervention. The time frame for evaluating the learning effect of the teaching intervention was almost exclusively short-time, with only one study evaluating the long-term utility of the educational program beyond 6 months. CONCLUSION: The literature on educational interventions designed to improve contouring performance is limited and heterogenous. Onsite, online and blended learning courses have all been shown to be helpful, however, sample sizes are small and impact assessment is almost exclusively short-term and typically does not take into account the effect on treatment planning. The most effective teaching methodology/format is unknown and impact on daily clinical practice is uncertain.
Authors: Raymond B Mailhot Vega; Dolores De La Mata; Beatriz Amendola; Benjamin Li; Adela Poitevin; Gustavo Sarria; Sebastian Sole; David J Sher; Patricia Hardenbergh Journal: JCO Glob Oncol Date: 2021-01
Authors: Bin Tang; Min Liu; Bingjie Wang; Peng Diao; Jie Li; Xi Feng; Fan Wu; Xinghong Yao; Xiongfei Liao; Qing Hou; Lucia Clara Orlandini Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-08-29 Impact factor: 5.738