Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Perceptions on and roadblocks to implementation of standardized nomenclature in radiation oncology: A survey from TG-263U1.
Covington, Elizabeth L; Suresh, Krithika; Anderson, Brian M; Barker, Margaret; Dess, Kathryn; Price, Jeremy G; Moncion, Alexander; Vaccarelli, Marissa J; Santanam, Lakshmi; Xiao, Ying; Mayo, Charles.
Afiliación
  • Covington EL; Department of Radiation Oncology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • Suresh K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • Anderson BM; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA.
  • Barker M; Memorial Care, Long Beach, California, USA.
  • Dess K; Department of Radiation Oncology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • Price JG; Department of Radiation Oncology, Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Moncion A; Department of Radiation Oncology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
  • Vaccarelli MJ; Northwell Health, Lake Success, New York, USA.
  • Santanam L; Medical Physics Department, Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center, New York, New York, USA.
  • Xiao Y; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  • Mayo C; Department of Radiation Oncology, Michigan Medicine, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA.
J Appl Clin Med Phys ; 25(6): e14359, 2024 Jun.
Article en En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38689502
ABSTRACT

PURPOSE:

AAPM Task Group No. 263U1 (Update to Report No. 263 - Standardizing Nomenclatures in Radiation Oncology) disseminated a survey to receive feedback on utilization, gaps, and means to facilitate further adoption.

METHODS:

The survey was created by TG-263U1 members to solicit feedback from physicists, dosimetrists, and physicians working in radiation oncology. Questions on the adoption of the TG-263 standard were coupled with demographic information, such as clinical role, place of primary employment (e.g., private hospital, academic center), and size of institution. The survey was emailed to all AAPM, AAMD, and ASTRO members.

RESULTS:

The survey received 463 responses with 310 completed survey responses used for analysis, of whom most had the clinical role of medical physicist (73%) and the majority were from the United States (83%). There were 83% of respondents who indicated that they believe that having a nomenclature standard is important or very important and 61% had adopted all or portions of TG-263 in their clinics. For those yet to adopt TG-263, the staffing and implementation efforts were the main cause for delaying adoption. Fewer respondents had trouble adopting TG-263 for organs at risk (29%) versus target (44%) nomenclature. Common themes in written feedback were lack of physician support and available resources, especially in vendor systems, to facilitate adoption.

CONCLUSIONS:

While there is strong support and belief in the benefit of standardized nomenclature, the widespread adoption of TG-263 has been hindered by the effort needed by staff for implementation.  Feedback from the survey is being utilized to drive the focus of the update efforts and create tools to facilitate easier adoption of TG-263.
Asunto(s)
Palabras clave

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Oncología por Radiación / Terminología como Asunto Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Appl Clin Med Phys Asunto de la revista: BIOFISICA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos

Texto completo: 1 Colección: 01-internacional Base de datos: MEDLINE Asunto principal: Oncología por Radiación / Terminología como Asunto Límite: Humans Idioma: En Revista: J Appl Clin Med Phys Asunto de la revista: BIOFISICA Año: 2024 Tipo del documento: Article País de afiliación: Estados Unidos Pais de publicación: Estados Unidos