Prospective monitoring of standardized radiotherapy compliance

Document Type

Conference Proceeding

Publication Date

8-17-2022

Publication Title

Med Phys

Keywords

adult, cancer patient, cancer radiotherapy, cohort analysis, conference abstract, controlled study, education, feedback system, human, human experiment, major clinical study, male, nomenclature, patient assessment, prospective study, prostate cancer, protocol compliance, radiotherapy, simulation, software, treatment planning

Abstract

Purpose: To evaluate the usage of standardized radiotherapy protocol compliance software and its ability to assess adherence to institutional protocols in prospective use. Methods: An automated protocol compliance software tool based on the AAPM Task Group 275 and 263 recommendations has been previously developed, validated, and published [1] for a prostate cancer patient cohort and is used prospectively. This work demonstrates compliance adherence prospectively compared to a published cohort. Results: Since February 2020, 112 plans underwent prospective use with the automated protocol compliance software, with a mean pass rate (standard deviation) of 92.3% (6.5%) and mean fail rate (standard deviation) of 6.7% (6.0%), compared to 92.3% (6.1%) and 6.0% (5.8%) in a previous cohort (n = 58). Patient Assessment, Simulation, and Treatment Planning accounted for 8.7%, 0.4%, and 91.0% of failures, respectively, compared to the previous cohort at 2.6%, 0.0%, 97.4%. Contouring checks predominated Treatment Planning failures for both cohorts at 33.3% and 39.3%. Iterative use of this tool demonstrated a mean pass rate improvement of 0.8% (61 plans underwent multiple iterations, with mean pass rates of 94.3% (4.5%) and 95.1% (4.1%) for first and final iterations). Conclusion: The prospective use of the protocol compliance framework shows sustained ability to maintain protocol compliance adherence. The persistence of high failure rates in contouring can be primarily attributed to non-compliance with TG 263 nomenclature. Continued education and tighter feedback loops with clinicians can improve further compliance.

Volume

49

Issue

8

First Page

5648

Find It @ Sladen

Share

COinS