Society of Chairs of Academic Radiation Oncology Programs–Endorsed Radiation Oncology Department Review Process
No abstract prepared.
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
Engineering topics
Formenti, Silvia C.
Publications and source records attributed to Formenti, Silvia C..
Burnout in United States Academic Chairs of Radiation Oncology Programs
Purpose: The aims of this study were to determine the self-reported prevalence of burnout in chairs of academic radiation oncology departments, to identify factors contributing to burnout, and to compare the prevalence of burnout with that seen in other academic chair groups. Methods and Materials: An anonymous online survey was administered to the membership of the Society of Chairs of Academic Radiation Oncology Programs (SCAROP). Burnout was measured with the Maslach Burnout Inventory-Human Services Survey (MBI-HSS). Results: Questionnaires were returned from 66 of 87 chairs (76% response rate). Seventy-nine percent of respondents reported satisfaction with their current positions. Common major stressors were budget deficits and human resource issues. One-quarter of chairs reported that it was at least moderately likely that they would step down in the next 1 to 2 years; these individuals demonstrated significantly higher emotional exhaustion. Twenty-five percent of respondents met the MBI-HSS criteria for low burnout, 75% for moderate burnout, and none for high burnout. Group MBI-HSS subscale scores demonstrated a pattern of moderate emotional exhaustion, low depersonalization, and moderate personal accomplishment, comparing favorably with other specialties. Conclusions: This is the first study of burnout in radiation oncology chairs with a high response rate and using a validated psychometric tool. Radiation oncology chairs share similar major stressors to other chair groups, but they demonstrate relatively high job satisfaction and lower burnout. Emotional exhaustion may contribute to the anticipated turnover in coming years. Further efforts addressing individual and institutional factors associated with burnout may improve the relationship with work of chairs and other department members.
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
Current Status and Recommendations for the Future of Research, Teaching, and Testing in the Biological Sciences of Radiation Oncology: Report of the American Society for Radiation Oncology Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force, Executive Summary
In early 2011, a dialogue was initiated within the Board of Directors (BOD) of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO) regarding the future of the basic sciences of the specialty, primarily focused on the current state and potential future direction of basic research within radiation oncology. After consideration of the complexity of the issues involved and the precise nature of the undertaking, in August 2011, the BOD empanelled a Cancer Biology/Radiation Biology Task Force (TF). The TF was charged with developing an accurate snapshot of the current state of basic (preclinical) research in radiation oncology from the perspective of relevance to the modern clinical practice of radiation oncology as well as the education of our trainees and attending physicians in the biological sciences. The TF was further charged with making suggestions as to critical areas of biological basic research investigation that might be most likely to maintain and build further the scientific foundation and vitality of radiation oncology as an independent and vibrant medical specialty. It was not within the scope of service of the TF to consider the quality of ongoing research efforts within the broader radiation oncology space, to presume to consider their future potential, or to discourage in any way the investigators committed to areas of interest other than those targeted. The TF charge specifically precluded consideration of research issues related to technology, physics, or clinical investigations. This document represents an Executive Summary of the Task Force report.
62 RADIOLOGY AND NUCLEAR MEDICINE↗
Automated beam placement for breast radiotherapy using a support vector machine based algorithm
Purpose: To develop an automated beam placement technique for whole breast radiotherapy using tangential beams. We seek to find optimal parameters for tangential beams to cover the whole ipsilateral breast (WB) and minimize the dose to the organs at risk (OARs). Methods: A support vector machine (SVM) based method is proposed to determine the optimal posterior plane of the tangential beams. Relative significances of including/avoiding the volumes of interests are incorporated into the cost function of the SVM. After finding the optimal 3-D plane that separates the whole breast (WB) and the included clinical target volumes (CTVs) from the OARs, the gantry angle, collimator angle, and posterior jaw size of the tangential beams are derived from the separating plane equation. Dosimetric measures of the treatment plans determined by the automated method are compared with those obtained by applying manual beam placement by the physicians. The method can be further extended to use multileaf collimator (MLC) blocking by optimizing posterior MLC positions. Results: The plans for 36 patients (23 prone- and 13 supine-treated) with left breast cancer were analyzed. Our algorithm reduced the volume of the heart that receives >500 cGy dose (V5) from 2.7 to 1.7 cm{sup 3} (p = 0.058) on average and the volume of the ipsilateral lung that receives >1000 cGy dose (V10) from 55.2 to 40.7 cm{sup 3} (p = 0.0013). The dose coverage as measured by volume receiving >95% of the prescription dose (V95%) of the WB without a 5 mm superficial layer decreases by only 0.74% (p = 0.0002) and the V95% for the tumor bed with 1.5 cm margin remains unchanged. Conclusions: This study has demonstrated the feasibility of using a SVM-based algorithm to determine optimal beam placement without a physician's intervention. The proposed method reduced the dose to OARs, especially for supine treated patients, without any relevant degradation of dose homogeneity and coverage in general.
46 INSTRUMENTATION RELATED TO NUCLEAR SCIENCE AND ↗