TY - JOUR
T1 - Interprofessional Image Verification Workshop for Physician and Physics Residents
T2 - A Multi-Institutional Experience
AU - Padilla, Laura
AU - Burmeister, Jay W.
AU - Burnett, Omer Lee
AU - Covington, Elizabeth L.
AU - Den, Robert B.
AU - Dominello, Michael M.
AU - Du, Kevin L.
AU - Galavis, Paulina E.
AU - Junell, Stephanie
AU - Kahn, Jenna
AU - Kishore, Monica
AU - Mooney, Karen
AU - Mukhopadhyay, Nitai D.
AU - Studenski, Matthew T.
AU - Yechieli, Raphael L.
AU - Fields, Emma C.
N1 - Funding Information:
Disclosures: The authors have no conflict of interest or funding to report related to this project. The statistical analysis was partially supported by Award No. P30 CA016059NIH from the NCI Cancer Center Support Grant.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2021
PY - 2021/11/15
Y1 - 2021/11/15
N2 - Purpose: Verification of patient position through pretreatment setup imaging is crucial in modern radiation therapy. As treatment complexity increases and technology evolves, physicist-physician collaboration becomes imperative for safe and successful radiation delivery. Despite the importance of both, residency programs lack formal interprofessional education (IPE) activities or structured training for image verification. Here we show the impact of an interprofessional image verification workshop for residents in a multi-institutional setting. Methods: The workshop included a lecture by the attending physicist and physician, and hands-on image registration practice by learners (medical physics residents, MP; and radiation oncology residents, RO). All participants filled out pre- and postactivity surveys and rated their comfort from 1 to 10 in (A) selecting what type of imaging to order for a given case and (B) independently assessing the setup quality based on imaging. A paired 1-tailed t test (α = 0.05) was used to evaluate significance; Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to assess correlation of ratings and RO postgraduate year (PGY). Surveys had free-response questions about IPE and image verification activities in residency. Results: A total of 71 residents from 7 institutions participated between 2018 and 2020. Pre- and postsurveys were completed by 50 residents (38RO, 12MP) and showed an increase in (A) from 5.5 ± 2.2 to 7.1 ± 1.6 (P <.001) and in (B) from 5.1 ± 2.3 to 6.8 ± 1.5 (P <.001), with significant increases per subgroup (AΔ, RO = 1.8 ± 1.7, P <.001; BΔ, RO = 1.9 ± 1.8, P <. 001; AΔ, MP = 1.1 ± 1.4, P =.012; BΔ, MP = 1.2 ± 1.6, P =.016). RO confidence scores moderately correlated with PGY. Survey responses indicated that image verification training is mostly unstructured, with extent of exposure varying by program and attending; most with little-to-no training. Time constraints were identified as the main barrier. IPE was noted as a useful way to incorporate different perspectives into the process. Conclusions: Formal image verification training increases resident comfort with setup imaging review and provides opportunities for interprofessional collaboration in radiation oncology residency programs.
AB - Purpose: Verification of patient position through pretreatment setup imaging is crucial in modern radiation therapy. As treatment complexity increases and technology evolves, physicist-physician collaboration becomes imperative for safe and successful radiation delivery. Despite the importance of both, residency programs lack formal interprofessional education (IPE) activities or structured training for image verification. Here we show the impact of an interprofessional image verification workshop for residents in a multi-institutional setting. Methods: The workshop included a lecture by the attending physicist and physician, and hands-on image registration practice by learners (medical physics residents, MP; and radiation oncology residents, RO). All participants filled out pre- and postactivity surveys and rated their comfort from 1 to 10 in (A) selecting what type of imaging to order for a given case and (B) independently assessing the setup quality based on imaging. A paired 1-tailed t test (α = 0.05) was used to evaluate significance; Spearman rank correlation coefficient was used to assess correlation of ratings and RO postgraduate year (PGY). Surveys had free-response questions about IPE and image verification activities in residency. Results: A total of 71 residents from 7 institutions participated between 2018 and 2020. Pre- and postsurveys were completed by 50 residents (38RO, 12MP) and showed an increase in (A) from 5.5 ± 2.2 to 7.1 ± 1.6 (P <.001) and in (B) from 5.1 ± 2.3 to 6.8 ± 1.5 (P <.001), with significant increases per subgroup (AΔ, RO = 1.8 ± 1.7, P <.001; BΔ, RO = 1.9 ± 1.8, P <. 001; AΔ, MP = 1.1 ± 1.4, P =.012; BΔ, MP = 1.2 ± 1.6, P =.016). RO confidence scores moderately correlated with PGY. Survey responses indicated that image verification training is mostly unstructured, with extent of exposure varying by program and attending; most with little-to-no training. Time constraints were identified as the main barrier. IPE was noted as a useful way to incorporate different perspectives into the process. Conclusions: Formal image verification training increases resident comfort with setup imaging review and provides opportunities for interprofessional collaboration in radiation oncology residency programs.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85114383150&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85114383150&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.1706
DO - 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2021.07.1706
M3 - Article
C2 - 34380009
AN - SCOPUS:85114383150
SN - 0360-3016
VL - 111
SP - 1058
EP - 1065
JO - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
JF - International Journal of Radiation Oncology Biology Physics
IS - 4
ER -