Prospective clinical evaluation of integrating a radiation anatomist for contouring in routine radiation treatment planning Journal Article
| Authors: | Zhang, H.; Onochie, I.; Hilal, L.; Wijetunga, N. A.; Hipp, E.; Guttmann, D. M.; Cahlon, O.; Washington, C.; Gomez, D. R.; Gillespie, E. F. |
| Article Title: | Prospective clinical evaluation of integrating a radiation anatomist for contouring in routine radiation treatment planning |
| Abstract: | Purpose: A radiation anatomist was trained and integrated into clinical practice at a multi-site academic center. The primary objective of this quality improvement study was to determine whether a radiation anatomist improves the quality of organ-at-risk (OAR) contours, and secondarily to determine the impact on efficiency in the treatment planning process. Methods and Materials: From March to August 2020, all patients undergoing computed tomography–based radiation planning at 2 clinics at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center were assigned using an “every other” process to either (1) OAR contouring by a radiation anatomist (intervention) or (2) contouring by the treating physician (standard of care). Blinded dosimetrists reported OAR contour quality using a 3-point scoring system based on a common clinical trial protocol deviation scale (1, acceptable; 2, minor deviation; and 3, major deviation). Physicians reported time spent contouring for all cases. Analyses included the Fisher exact test and multivariable ordinal logistic regression. Results: There were 249 cases with data available for the primary endpoint (66% response rate). The mean OAR quality rating was 1.1 ± 0.4 for the intervention group and 1.4 ± 0.7 for the standard of care group (P <.001), with subset analysis showing a significant difference for gastrointestinal cases (n = 49; P <.001). Time from simulation to contour approval was reduced from 3 days (interquartile range [IQR], 1-6 days) in the control group to 2 days (IQR, 1-5 days) in the intervention group (P =.007). Both physicians and dosimetrists self-reported decreased time spent contouring in the intervention group compared with the control group, with a decreases of 8 minutes (17%; P <.001) and 5 minutes (50%; P =.002), respectively. Qualitative comments most often indicated edits required to bowel contours (n = 14). Conclusions: These findings support improvements in both OAR contour quality and workflow efficiency with implementation of a radiation anatomist in routine practice. Findings could also inform development of autosegmentation by identifying disease sites and specific OARs contributing to low clinical efficiency. Future research is needed to determine the potential effect of reduced physician time spent contouring OARs on burnout. © 2022 The Authors |
| Keywords: | controlled study; major clinical study; intensity modulated radiation therapy; treatment planning; cancer radiotherapy; prospective study; computer assisted tomography; cohort analysis; self report; simulation; health care quality; clinical evaluation; scoring system; anatomy; stereotactic radiosurgery; observational study; stereotactic body radiation therapy; volumetric modulated arc therapy; gastrointestinal cancer; image segmentation; conformal radiotherapy; workflow; organs at risk; human; article; quality improvement study |
| Journal Title: | Advances in Radiation Oncology |
| Volume: | 7 |
| Issue: | 6 |
| ISSN: | 2452-1094 |
| Publisher: | Elsevier Inc. |
| Date Published: | 2022-11-01 |
| Start Page: | 101009 |
| Language: | English |
| DOI: | 10.1016/j.adro.2022.101009 |
| PROVIDER: | scopus |
| PMCID: | PMC9449753 |
| PUBMED: | 36092987 |
| DOI/URL: | |
| Notes: | Article -- Export Date: 1 November 2022 -- Source: Scopus |
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
Related MSK Work