skip to main content
OSTI.GOV title logo U.S. Department of Energy
Office of Scientific and Technical Information

Title: Clinical Fundamentals for Radiation Oncology Residents


No abstract prepared.

; ;
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 34; Journal Issue: 2; Other Information: DOI: 10.1118/1.2433726; (c) 2007 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States

Citation Formats

Murshed, Hasan, Le Fave, Kelly E., and Both, Joseph A. Clinical Fundamentals for Radiation Oncology Residents. United States: N. p., 2007. Web. doi:10.1118/1.2433726.
Murshed, Hasan, Le Fave, Kelly E., & Both, Joseph A. Clinical Fundamentals for Radiation Oncology Residents. United States. doi:10.1118/1.2433726.
Murshed, Hasan, Le Fave, Kelly E., and Both, Joseph A. Thu . "Clinical Fundamentals for Radiation Oncology Residents". United States. doi:10.1118/1.2433726.
title = {Clinical Fundamentals for Radiation Oncology Residents},
author = {Murshed, Hasan and Le Fave, Kelly E. and Both, Joseph A},
abstractNote = {No abstract prepared.},
doi = {10.1118/1.2433726},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 2,
volume = 34,
place = {United States},
year = {Thu Feb 15 00:00:00 EST 2007},
month = {Thu Feb 15 00:00:00 EST 2007}
  • Purpose: To document clinical training and resident working conditions reported by chief residents during their residency. Methods and Materials: During the academic years 2005 to 2006, 2006 to 2007, and 2007 to 2008, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology conducted a nationwide survey of all radiation oncology chief residents in the United States. Chi-square statistics were used to assess changes in clinical training and resident working conditions over time. Results: Surveys were completed by representatives from 55 programs (response rate, 71.4%) in 2005 to 2006, 60 programs (75.9%) in 2006 to 2007, and 74 programs (93.7%) in 2007 tomore » 2008. Nearly all chief residents reported receiving adequate clinical experience in commonly treated disease sites, such as breast and genitourinary malignancies; and commonly performed procedures, such as three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy and intensity-modulated radiotherapy. Clinical experience in extracranial stereotactic radiotherapy increased over time (p < 0.001), whereas clinical experience in endovascular brachytherapy (p <0.001) decreased over time. The distribution of gynecologic and prostate brachytherapy cases remained stable, while clinical case load in breast brachytherapy increased (p = 0.006). A small but significant percentage of residents reported receiving inadequate clinical experience in pediatrics, seeing 10 or fewer pediatric cases during the course of residency. Procedures involving higher capital costs, such as particle beam therapy and intraoperative radiotherapy, and infrequent clinical use, such as head and neck brachytherapy, were limited to a minority of institutions. Most residency programs associated with at least one satellite facility have incorporated resident rotations into their clinical training, and the majority of residents at these programs find them valuable experiences. The majority of residents reported working 60 or fewer hours per week on required clinical duties. Conclusions: Trends in clinical training and resident working conditions over 3 years are documented to allow residents and program directors to assess their residency training.« less
  • Purpose: To document demographic characteristics of current residents, career motivations and aspirations, and training program policies and resources. Methods: In 2003, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) conducted two nationwide surveys: one of all U.S. radiation oncology residents and one of chief residents. Results: The Chief Residents' Survey was completed by representatives from all 77 programs (response rate, 100%). The Residents' Survey was returned by 229 respondents (response rate, 44%). In each, 32% of respondents were female. The most popular career after residency was private practice (46%), followed by permanent academic practice (28%). Changes that would entice thosemore » choosing private practice to consider an academic career included more research experience as a resident (76%), higher likelihood of tenure (69%), lesser time commitment (66%), and higher salary (54%). Although the majority of respondents were satisfied with educational experience overall, a number of programs were reported to provide fewer resources than required. Conclusions: Median program resources and numbers of outliers are documented to allow residents and program directors to assess the relative adequacy of experience in their own programs. Policy-making bodies and individual programs should consider these results when developing interventions to improve educational experiences of residents and to increase retention of radiation oncologists in academic practice.« less
  • Purpose: To assess radiation oncology residents' needs and satisfaction in their first postgraduate year (PGY-1) in the province of Ontario. Methods and Materials: Of 62 radiation oncology residents, 58 who had completed their PGY-1 and were either enrolled or had graduated in 2006 were invited to participate in a 31-item survey. The questionnaire explored PGY-1 residents' needs and satisfaction in four domains: clinical workload, faculty/learning environment, stress level, and discrimination/harassment. The Fisher's exact and Wilcoxon nonparametric tests were used to determine relationships between covariate items and summary scores. Results: Of 58 eligible residents, 44 (75%) responded. Eighty-four percent of residentsmore » felt that their ward and call duties were appropriate. More than 50% of respondents indicated that they often felt isolated from their radiation oncology program. Only 77% agreed that they received adequate feedback, and 40% received sufficient counseling regarding career planning. More than 93% of respondents thought that faculty members had contributed significantly to their learning experience. Approximately 50% of residents experienced excessive stress and inadequate time for leisure or for reading the medical literature. Less than 10% of residents indicated that they had been harassed or experienced discrimination. Eighty-three percent agreed or strongly agreed that their PGY-1 experience had been outstanding. Conclusions: Most Ontario residents were satisfied with their PGY-1 training program. More counseling by radiation oncology faculty members should be offered to help residents with career planning. The residents might also benefit from more exposure to 'radiation oncology' and an introduction to stress management strategies.« less
  • Purpose/Objective(s): To determine the timeline used by postgraduate year (PGY)-5 radiation oncology residents during the job application process and the factors most important to them when deciding on a first job. Methods and Materials: In 2012 and 2013, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology conducted a nationwide electronic survey of PGY-5 radiation oncology residents in the United States during the final 2 months of their training. Descriptive statistics are reported. In addition, subgroup analysis was performed. Results: Surveys were completed by 180 of 314 residents contacted. The median time to start networking for the purpose of employment was Januarymore » PGY-4; to start contacting practices, complete and upload a curriculum vitae to a job search website, and use the American Society of Radiation Oncology Career Center was June PGY-4; to obtain letters of recommendation was July PGY-5; to start interviewing was August PGY-5; to finish interviewing was December PGY-5; and to accept a contract was January PGY-5. Those applying for a community position began interviewing at an earlier average time than did those applying for an academic position (P=.04). The most important factors to residents when they evaluated job offers included (in order from most to least important) a collegial environment, geographic location, emphasis on best patient care, quality of support staff and facility, and multidisciplinary approach to patient care. Factors that were rated significantly different between subgroups based on the type of position applied for included adequate mentoring, dedicated research time, access to clinical trials, amount of time it takes to become a partner, geographic location, size of group, starting salary, and amount of vacation and days off. Conclusions: The residents' perspective on the job application process over 2 years is documented to provide a resource for current and future residents and employers to use.« less
  • Purpose: The purpose of this project was to survey radiation oncology chief residents to define their residency experience and readiness for independent practice. Methods and Materials: During the academic years 2013 to 2014 and 2014 to 2015, the Association of Residents in Radiation Oncology (ARRO) conducted an electronic survey of post-graduate year-5 radiation oncology residents in the United States during the final 3 months of training. Descriptive statistics are reported. Results: Sixty-six chief residents completed the survey in 2013 to 2014 (53% response rate), and 69 completed the survey in 2014 to 2015 (64% response rate). Forty to 85% percent ofmore » residents reported inadequate exposure to high-dose rate and low-dose rate brachytherapy. Nearly all residents in both years (>90%) reported adequate clinical experience for the following disease sites: breast, central nervous system, gastrointestinal, genitourinary, head and neck, and lung. However, as few as 56% reported adequate experience in lymphoma or pediatric malignancies. More than 90% of residents had participated in retrospective research projects, with 20% conducting resident-led prospective clinical trials and 50% conducting basic science or translational projects. Most chief residents reported working 60 or fewer hours per week in the clinical/hospital setting and performing fewer than 15 hours per week tasks that were considered to have little or no educational value. There was more than 80% compliance with Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education (ACGME) work hour limits. Fifty-five percent of graduating residents intended to join an established private practice group, compared to 25% who headed for academia. Residents perceive the job market to be more competitive than previous years. Conclusions: This first update of the ARRO chief resident survey since the 2007 to 2008 academic year documents US radiation oncology residents' experiences and conditions over a 2-year period. This analysis may serve as a valuable tool for those seeking to improve training of the next generation of oncology leaders.« less