Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process

Ensuring high-quality radiotherapy requires peer-reviewing target volumes. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends peer review specifically for individual target volumes in cases of gynaecological cancers. This study presents the outcomes of implementing an on-demand peer review system for gyna...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:British journal of radiology 2024-02, Vol.97 (1155), p.680-693
Hauptverfasser: Bhattacharyya, Tapesh, Chakraborty, Santam, Achari, Rimpa Basu, Mallick, Indranil, Arunsingh, Moses, Shenoy, Shashank, Harilal, Vishnu, Phesao, Vezokhoto, Maulik, Shaurav, Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal, Mukherjee, Prattusha, Sarkar, Nivedita, Sinha, Avinaba, Sarkar, Sebanti, Vashistha, Bhanu, Khanum, Hashmath, Chatterjee, Sanjoy
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 693
container_issue 1155
container_start_page 680
container_title British journal of radiology
container_volume 97
creator Bhattacharyya, Tapesh
Chakraborty, Santam
Achari, Rimpa Basu
Mallick, Indranil
Arunsingh, Moses
Shenoy, Shashank
Harilal, Vishnu
Phesao, Vezokhoto
Maulik, Shaurav
Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal
Mukherjee, Prattusha
Sarkar, Nivedita
Sinha, Avinaba
Sarkar, Sebanti
Vashistha, Bhanu
Khanum, Hashmath
Chatterjee, Sanjoy
description Ensuring high-quality radiotherapy requires peer-reviewing target volumes. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends peer review specifically for individual target volumes in cases of gynaecological cancers. This study presents the outcomes of implementing an on-demand peer review system for gynaecological cancers within our institute. The peer review process was planned for gynaecological cancer cases intended for curative radiotherapy. After junior clinical oncologists (COs) completed the segmentation, two senior COs specializing in gynaecological cancers conducted the peer review. All peer review outcomes were recorded prospectively. The audit process compliance, the proportion of patients requiring major and minor modifications in target volumes, the direction of changes, and the factors influencing these changes were reported. A total of 230 patients were eligible, and out of these, 204 (88.3%) patients underwent at least one peer review. Among the patients, 108 required major modifications in their target volumes. P-charts revealed a stabilization in the need for major modifications at the end of three months, indicating that 38.2% and 28% of patients still required major modifications for the nodal and primary CTV, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that major modifications were associated with the use of extended field radiotherapy and radical radiation in non-cervical primary cases. An on-demand peer review system was feasible and resulted in clinically meaningful, major modifications in the target volumes for 53% of patients. Gynaecological cancers require ongoing peer review to ensure quality of care in radiotherapy. A flexible on-demand system not only ensures that patient treatment start is not delayed but also has an important educational role for junior trainees.
doi_str_mv 10.1093/bjr/tqae019
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2933460049</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2933460049</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-68c6d8f6c5dd31817eb8d07bc016d3fbb229482821f2fc9c6acb75320d0aef2c3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNo9kEtLxDAURoMozvhYuZcsBamTRx-pOxl8wYAbBXclTW7GDG3SSVql_no7OLq5l_tx-C4chC4ouaGk5It6Exb9VgKh5QGa0yIViRDk_RDNCSFFQpnIZugkxs3uzEpyjGZcpIRmnM_R9737kE5Zt8bbQTa2H7GMcQhTBtg6HKS2vv-AILsRGx_wenQSlG_82irZYLUDQ7zFtu0aaMH1srfeYW-wnKZLNLTSadwBBBzg08IX7oJXEOMZOjKyiXC-36fo7eH-dfmUrF4en5d3q0QxkfZJLlSuhclVpjWnghZQC02KWhGaa27qmrEyFUwwaphRpcqlqouMM6KJBMMUP0VXv73T3-0Asa9aGxU0jXTgh1ixkvM0JyQtJ_T6F1XBxxjAVF2wrQxjRUm1k11Nsqu97Im-3BcPdQv6n_2zy38A0BJ_Kw</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2933460049</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process</title><source>Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)</source><creator>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh ; Chakraborty, Santam ; Achari, Rimpa Basu ; Mallick, Indranil ; Arunsingh, Moses ; Shenoy, Shashank ; Harilal, Vishnu ; Phesao, Vezokhoto ; Maulik, Shaurav ; Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal ; Mukherjee, Prattusha ; Sarkar, Nivedita ; Sinha, Avinaba ; Sarkar, Sebanti ; Vashistha, Bhanu ; Khanum, Hashmath ; Chatterjee, Sanjoy</creator><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh ; Chakraborty, Santam ; Achari, Rimpa Basu ; Mallick, Indranil ; Arunsingh, Moses ; Shenoy, Shashank ; Harilal, Vishnu ; Phesao, Vezokhoto ; Maulik, Shaurav ; Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal ; Mukherjee, Prattusha ; Sarkar, Nivedita ; Sinha, Avinaba ; Sarkar, Sebanti ; Vashistha, Bhanu ; Khanum, Hashmath ; Chatterjee, Sanjoy</creatorcontrib><description>Ensuring high-quality radiotherapy requires peer-reviewing target volumes. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends peer review specifically for individual target volumes in cases of gynaecological cancers. This study presents the outcomes of implementing an on-demand peer review system for gynaecological cancers within our institute. The peer review process was planned for gynaecological cancer cases intended for curative radiotherapy. After junior clinical oncologists (COs) completed the segmentation, two senior COs specializing in gynaecological cancers conducted the peer review. All peer review outcomes were recorded prospectively. The audit process compliance, the proportion of patients requiring major and minor modifications in target volumes, the direction of changes, and the factors influencing these changes were reported. A total of 230 patients were eligible, and out of these, 204 (88.3%) patients underwent at least one peer review. Among the patients, 108 required major modifications in their target volumes. P-charts revealed a stabilization in the need for major modifications at the end of three months, indicating that 38.2% and 28% of patients still required major modifications for the nodal and primary CTV, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that major modifications were associated with the use of extended field radiotherapy and radical radiation in non-cervical primary cases. An on-demand peer review system was feasible and resulted in clinically meaningful, major modifications in the target volumes for 53% of patients. Gynaecological cancers require ongoing peer review to ensure quality of care in radiotherapy. A flexible on-demand system not only ensures that patient treatment start is not delayed but also has an important educational role for junior trainees.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0007-1285</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1748-880X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1093/bjr/tqae019</identifier><identifier>PMID: 38401533</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><ispartof>British journal of radiology, 2024-02, Vol.97 (1155), p.680-693</ispartof><rights>The Author(s) 2024. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Institute of Radiology. All rights reserved. For permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oup.com.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><orcidid>0000-0003-3580-5979</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,27923,27924</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/38401533$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Santam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Achari, Rimpa Basu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mallick, Indranil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arunsingh, Moses</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shenoy, Shashank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harilal, Vishnu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phesao, Vezokhoto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maulik, Shaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mukherjee, Prattusha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Nivedita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinha, Avinaba</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Sebanti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vashistha, Bhanu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khanum, Hashmath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chatterjee, Sanjoy</creatorcontrib><title>Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process</title><title>British journal of radiology</title><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><description>Ensuring high-quality radiotherapy requires peer-reviewing target volumes. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends peer review specifically for individual target volumes in cases of gynaecological cancers. This study presents the outcomes of implementing an on-demand peer review system for gynaecological cancers within our institute. The peer review process was planned for gynaecological cancer cases intended for curative radiotherapy. After junior clinical oncologists (COs) completed the segmentation, two senior COs specializing in gynaecological cancers conducted the peer review. All peer review outcomes were recorded prospectively. The audit process compliance, the proportion of patients requiring major and minor modifications in target volumes, the direction of changes, and the factors influencing these changes were reported. A total of 230 patients were eligible, and out of these, 204 (88.3%) patients underwent at least one peer review. Among the patients, 108 required major modifications in their target volumes. P-charts revealed a stabilization in the need for major modifications at the end of three months, indicating that 38.2% and 28% of patients still required major modifications for the nodal and primary CTV, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that major modifications were associated with the use of extended field radiotherapy and radical radiation in non-cervical primary cases. An on-demand peer review system was feasible and resulted in clinically meaningful, major modifications in the target volumes for 53% of patients. Gynaecological cancers require ongoing peer review to ensure quality of care in radiotherapy. A flexible on-demand system not only ensures that patient treatment start is not delayed but also has an important educational role for junior trainees.</description><issn>0007-1285</issn><issn>1748-880X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2024</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNo9kEtLxDAURoMozvhYuZcsBamTRx-pOxl8wYAbBXclTW7GDG3SSVql_no7OLq5l_tx-C4chC4ouaGk5It6Exb9VgKh5QGa0yIViRDk_RDNCSFFQpnIZugkxs3uzEpyjGZcpIRmnM_R9737kE5Zt8bbQTa2H7GMcQhTBtg6HKS2vv-AILsRGx_wenQSlG_82irZYLUDQ7zFtu0aaMH1srfeYW-wnKZLNLTSadwBBBzg08IX7oJXEOMZOjKyiXC-36fo7eH-dfmUrF4en5d3q0QxkfZJLlSuhclVpjWnghZQC02KWhGaa27qmrEyFUwwaphRpcqlqouMM6KJBMMUP0VXv73T3-0Asa9aGxU0jXTgh1ixkvM0JyQtJ_T6F1XBxxjAVF2wrQxjRUm1k11Nsqu97Im-3BcPdQv6n_2zy38A0BJ_Kw</recordid><startdate>20240228</startdate><enddate>20240228</enddate><creator>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh</creator><creator>Chakraborty, Santam</creator><creator>Achari, Rimpa Basu</creator><creator>Mallick, Indranil</creator><creator>Arunsingh, Moses</creator><creator>Shenoy, Shashank</creator><creator>Harilal, Vishnu</creator><creator>Phesao, Vezokhoto</creator><creator>Maulik, Shaurav</creator><creator>Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal</creator><creator>Mukherjee, Prattusha</creator><creator>Sarkar, Nivedita</creator><creator>Sinha, Avinaba</creator><creator>Sarkar, Sebanti</creator><creator>Vashistha, Bhanu</creator><creator>Khanum, Hashmath</creator><creator>Chatterjee, Sanjoy</creator><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3580-5979</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20240228</creationdate><title>Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process</title><author>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh ; Chakraborty, Santam ; Achari, Rimpa Basu ; Mallick, Indranil ; Arunsingh, Moses ; Shenoy, Shashank ; Harilal, Vishnu ; Phesao, Vezokhoto ; Maulik, Shaurav ; Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal ; Mukherjee, Prattusha ; Sarkar, Nivedita ; Sinha, Avinaba ; Sarkar, Sebanti ; Vashistha, Bhanu ; Khanum, Hashmath ; Chatterjee, Sanjoy</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c284t-68c6d8f6c5dd31817eb8d07bc016d3fbb229482821f2fc9c6acb75320d0aef2c3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2024</creationdate><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chakraborty, Santam</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Achari, Rimpa Basu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mallick, Indranil</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Arunsingh, Moses</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shenoy, Shashank</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harilal, Vishnu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Phesao, Vezokhoto</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maulik, Shaurav</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Mukherjee, Prattusha</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Nivedita</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sinha, Avinaba</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Sarkar, Sebanti</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Vashistha, Bhanu</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Khanum, Hashmath</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chatterjee, Sanjoy</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bhattacharyya, Tapesh</au><au>Chakraborty, Santam</au><au>Achari, Rimpa Basu</au><au>Mallick, Indranil</au><au>Arunsingh, Moses</au><au>Shenoy, Shashank</au><au>Harilal, Vishnu</au><au>Phesao, Vezokhoto</au><au>Maulik, Shaurav</au><au>Manjunath, Nisarga Vontikoppal</au><au>Mukherjee, Prattusha</au><au>Sarkar, Nivedita</au><au>Sinha, Avinaba</au><au>Sarkar, Sebanti</au><au>Vashistha, Bhanu</au><au>Khanum, Hashmath</au><au>Chatterjee, Sanjoy</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process</atitle><jtitle>British journal of radiology</jtitle><addtitle>Br J Radiol</addtitle><date>2024-02-28</date><risdate>2024</risdate><volume>97</volume><issue>1155</issue><spage>680</spage><epage>693</epage><pages>680-693</pages><issn>0007-1285</issn><eissn>1748-880X</eissn><abstract>Ensuring high-quality radiotherapy requires peer-reviewing target volumes. The Royal College of Radiologists recommends peer review specifically for individual target volumes in cases of gynaecological cancers. This study presents the outcomes of implementing an on-demand peer review system for gynaecological cancers within our institute. The peer review process was planned for gynaecological cancer cases intended for curative radiotherapy. After junior clinical oncologists (COs) completed the segmentation, two senior COs specializing in gynaecological cancers conducted the peer review. All peer review outcomes were recorded prospectively. The audit process compliance, the proportion of patients requiring major and minor modifications in target volumes, the direction of changes, and the factors influencing these changes were reported. A total of 230 patients were eligible, and out of these, 204 (88.3%) patients underwent at least one peer review. Among the patients, 108 required major modifications in their target volumes. P-charts revealed a stabilization in the need for major modifications at the end of three months, indicating that 38.2% and 28% of patients still required major modifications for the nodal and primary CTV, respectively. Multivariable analysis demonstrated that major modifications were associated with the use of extended field radiotherapy and radical radiation in non-cervical primary cases. An on-demand peer review system was feasible and resulted in clinically meaningful, major modifications in the target volumes for 53% of patients. Gynaecological cancers require ongoing peer review to ensure quality of care in radiotherapy. A flexible on-demand system not only ensures that patient treatment start is not delayed but also has an important educational role for junior trainees.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>38401533</pmid><doi>10.1093/bjr/tqae019</doi><tpages>14</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3580-5979</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0007-1285
ispartof British journal of radiology, 2024-02, Vol.97 (1155), p.680-693
issn 0007-1285
1748-880X
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_2933460049
source Oxford University Press Journals All Titles (1996-Current)
title Enhancing quality assurance in radiotherapy for gynaecological cancers: implementation of an on-demand peer review process
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-08T16%3A42%3A35IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Enhancing%20quality%20assurance%20in%20radiotherapy%20for%20gynaecological%20cancers:%20implementation%20of%20an%20on-demand%20peer%20review%20process&rft.jtitle=British%20journal%20of%20radiology&rft.au=Bhattacharyya,%20Tapesh&rft.date=2024-02-28&rft.volume=97&rft.issue=1155&rft.spage=680&rft.epage=693&rft.pages=680-693&rft.issn=0007-1285&rft.eissn=1748-880X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1093/bjr/tqae019&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E2933460049%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2933460049&rft_id=info:pmid/38401533&rfr_iscdi=true