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

Title: SU-F-P-08: Medical Physics Perspective On Radiation Therapy Quality and Safety Considerations in Low Income Settings

Abstract

Purpose: The last few years have seen a significant growth of interest in the global radiation therapy crisis. Various organizations are quantifying the need and providing aid in support of addressing the shortfall existing in many low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). The Lancet Oncology Commission report (Lancet Oncol. Sep;16(10):1153-86, 2015) projects a need of 22,000 new medical physicists in LMICs by 2035 if there is to be equal access globally. With the tremendous demand for new facilities, equipment and personnel, it is very important to recognize quality and safety considerations and to address them directly. Methods: A detailed examination of quality and safety publications was undertaken. A paper by Dunscombe (Front. Oncol. 2: 129, 2012) reviewed the recommendations of 7 authoritative reports on safety in radiation therapy and found the 12 most cited recommendations, summarized in order of most to least cited: training, staffing, documentation/standard operating procedures, incident learning, communication/questioning, check lists, QC/PM, dosimetric audit, accreditation, minimizing interruptions, prospective risk assessment, and safety culture. However, these authoritative reports were generally based on input from high income contexts. In this work, the recommendations were analyzed with a special emphasis on issues that are significant in LMICs. Results: The review indicated that theremore » are significant challenges in LMICs with training and staffing ranking at the top in terms quality and safety. Conclusion: With the recognized need for expanding global access to radiation therapy, especially in LMICs, and the backing by multiple support organizations, quality and safety considerations must be overtly addressed. While multidimensional, training and staffing are top priorities. The use of outdated systems with poor interconnectivity, coupled with a lack of systematic QA in high patient load settings are additional concerns. Any support provided to lower resourced settings must address the multiple facets associated with these quality and safety indicators.« less

Authors:
 [1];  [2]
  1. Western University London, ON (Canada)
  2. International Atomic Energy Agency, Vienna (Austria)
Publication Date:
OSTI Identifier:
22624451
Resource Type:
Journal Article
Resource Relation:
Journal Name: Medical Physics; Journal Volume: 43; Journal Issue: 6; Other Information: (c) 2016 American Association of Physicists in Medicine; Country of input: International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)
Country of Publication:
United States
Language:
English
Subject:
60 APPLIED LIFE SCIENCES; 61 RADIATION PROTECTION AND DOSIMETRY; HAZARDS; LEARNING; MEDICAL PERSONNEL; PATIENTS; RADIATION ACCIDENTS; RADIOTHERAPY; RECOMMENDATIONS; REVIEWS; RISK ASSESSMENT; SAFETY; SAFETY CULTURE; TRAINING

Citation Formats

Van Dyk, J, and Meghzifene, A. SU-F-P-08: Medical Physics Perspective On Radiation Therapy Quality and Safety Considerations in Low Income Settings. United States: N. p., 2016. Web. doi:10.1118/1.4955715.
Van Dyk, J, & Meghzifene, A. SU-F-P-08: Medical Physics Perspective On Radiation Therapy Quality and Safety Considerations in Low Income Settings. United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955715.
Van Dyk, J, and Meghzifene, A. 2016. "SU-F-P-08: Medical Physics Perspective On Radiation Therapy Quality and Safety Considerations in Low Income Settings". United States. doi:10.1118/1.4955715.
@article{osti_22624451,
title = {SU-F-P-08: Medical Physics Perspective On Radiation Therapy Quality and Safety Considerations in Low Income Settings},
author = {Van Dyk, J and Meghzifene, A},
abstractNote = {Purpose: The last few years have seen a significant growth of interest in the global radiation therapy crisis. Various organizations are quantifying the need and providing aid in support of addressing the shortfall existing in many low-to-middle income countries (LMICs). The Lancet Oncology Commission report (Lancet Oncol. Sep;16(10):1153-86, 2015) projects a need of 22,000 new medical physicists in LMICs by 2035 if there is to be equal access globally. With the tremendous demand for new facilities, equipment and personnel, it is very important to recognize quality and safety considerations and to address them directly. Methods: A detailed examination of quality and safety publications was undertaken. A paper by Dunscombe (Front. Oncol. 2: 129, 2012) reviewed the recommendations of 7 authoritative reports on safety in radiation therapy and found the 12 most cited recommendations, summarized in order of most to least cited: training, staffing, documentation/standard operating procedures, incident learning, communication/questioning, check lists, QC/PM, dosimetric audit, accreditation, minimizing interruptions, prospective risk assessment, and safety culture. However, these authoritative reports were generally based on input from high income contexts. In this work, the recommendations were analyzed with a special emphasis on issues that are significant in LMICs. Results: The review indicated that there are significant challenges in LMICs with training and staffing ranking at the top in terms quality and safety. Conclusion: With the recognized need for expanding global access to radiation therapy, especially in LMICs, and the backing by multiple support organizations, quality and safety considerations must be overtly addressed. While multidimensional, training and staffing are top priorities. The use of outdated systems with poor interconnectivity, coupled with a lack of systematic QA in high patient load settings are additional concerns. Any support provided to lower resourced settings must address the multiple facets associated with these quality and safety indicators.},
doi = {10.1118/1.4955715},
journal = {Medical Physics},
number = 6,
volume = 43,
place = {United States},
year = 2016,
month = 6
}
  • Ensuring safe operation for a medical accelerator is a difficult task. Users must assume more responsibility in using contemporary equipment. Additionally, users must work closely with manufacturers in promoting the safe and effective use of such complex equipment. Complex treatment techniques and treatment modality changeover procedures merit detailed, unambiguous written procedural instruction at the control console. A thorough hands on training period after receiving instructions, and before assuming treatment responsibilities, is essential for all technologists. Unambiguous written instructions must also be provided to guide technologists in safe response when equipment malfunctions or exhibits unexpected behavior or after any component hasmore » been changed or readjusted. Technologists should be given a written list of the appropriate individuals to consult when unexpected machine behavior occurs. They should be assisted in identifying aberrant behavior of equipment. Many centers already provide this instruction, but others may not. Practiced response and discussion with technologists should be a part of an ongoing quality assurance program. An important aspect of a safety program is the need for continuous vigilance. Table III gives a summary of a comprehensive safety program for medical accelerators. Table IV gives a list of summary recommendations as an example of how one might mitigate the consequences of an equipment failure and improve procedures and operator response in the context of the environment described. Most of these recommendations can be implemented almost immediately at any individual treatment center.« less
  • A detailed analysis of the conditions underlying radiation hazards for medical staff engaged in applying intracavitary therapy by means of linear and volumetric (macro-suspensions) sources of Co/sup 60/ are given. Evidence was gained that the realization of both these methods of radiotherapy is attended with the irradiation of the physician and the nurse in doses inferior to maximally permissible ones, and with the irradiation of ward-attendants with doses equal to or above the established levels (during transportation of the patients from treatment rooms to their respective wards). With the use of a special safety device for the administration of macrosuspensions,more » the irradiation doses to which the personnel is exposed are appreciably lower than those noted in handling linear sources. (auth)« less
  • Purpose: A permanent breast seed implant (PBSI) technique has been developed as a new form of partial adjuvant radiation therapy for early-stage breast cancer. This study compares iodine-125 ({sup 125}I) and palladium-103 ({sup 103}Pd) isotopes by examining the exposure and effective dose (ED) to a patient's partner.Methods and Materials: A low-energy survey meter was used to measure exposure rates as a function of bolus thickness placed over {sup 103}Pd or {sup 125}I seeds. A general mathematical expression for the initial exposure rate at 1 m (x{sub o,1m}) from the skin surface as a function of the implant size, R, andmore » the distance between the skin surface and the implant, d, was derived. Also, a second general equation is proposed to calculate the ED to the patient's partner.Results: The initial exposure rate at 1 meter and the ED are calculated as follows: x{sub o,1m} = (3{alpha})/2R{sup 3}{center_dot}{beta}{sup 3} [e{sup -{beta}}{sup (2R+d)}({beta}R + 1) + e{sup -{beta}}{sup {center_dot}}{sup d}({beta}R - 1)], and ED = aR{sup b} {center_dot} [e{sup -c(2R+d)} {center_dot} (cR + 1) + e{sup -cd} -bar (cR - 1)]. For {sup 125}I, the parameters are: {alpha} = 0.154409, {beta} = 0.388460, a = 197, b = -0.95, and c = 0.38846. For {sup 103}Pd, they are: {alpha} = 0.06877, {beta} = 0.421098, a = 18.6, b -0.78, and c = 0.421098. For implant diameters varying from 2 to 6 cm and skin-to-implant distances varying from 0.7 to 4 cm, the ED is consistently below 2.6 mSv using the {sup 103}Pd isotope, but more than 5 mSv in many instances and possibly up to 20 mSv using {sup 125}I.Conclusions: PBSI using {sup 103}Pd seeds appears safe because the patient's partner ED is consistently below 5 mSv. The{sup 125}I isotope is not recommended for PBSI.« less
  • Synchrotron radiation (SR) therapy is a promising alternative to treat brain tumors, whose management is limited due to the high morbidity of the surrounding healthy tissues. Several approaches are being explored by using SR at the European Synchrotron Radiation Facility (ESRF), where three techniques are under development Synchrotron Stereotactic Radiation Therapy (SSRT), Microbeam Radiation Therapy (MRT) and Minibeam Radiation Therapy (MBRT).The sucess of the preclinical studies on SSRT and MRT has paved the way to clinical trials currently in preparation at the ESRF. With this aim, different dosimetric aspects from both theoretical and experimental points of view have been assessed.more » In particular, the definition of safe irradiation protocols, the beam energy providing the best balance between tumor treatment and healthy tissue sparing in MRT and MBRT, the special dosimetric considerations for small field dosimetry, etc will be described. In addition, for the clinical trials, the definition of appropiate dosimetry protocols for patients according to the well established European Medical Physics recommendations will be discussed. Finally, the state of the art of the MBRT technical developments at the ESRF will be presented. In 2006 A. Dilmanian and collaborators proposed the use of thicker microbeams (0.36-0.68 mm). This new type of radiotherapy is the most recently implemented technique at the ESRF and it has been called MBRT. The main advantage of MBRT with respect to MRT is that it does not require high dose rates. Therefore it can be more easily applied and extended outside synchrotron sources in the future.« less