Quantifying the Risk of Technology-Driven Health Disparities in Radiation Oncology.

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q2 ONCOLOGY Practical Radiation Oncology Pub Date : 2024-07-09 DOI:10.1016/j.prro.2024.06.009
Alexander Moncion, Alex K Bryant, Carlos E Cardenas, Kathryn J Dess, Maria N Ditman, Charles S Mayo, Michelle L Mierzwa, Kelly C Paradis, Dennis N Stanley, Elizabeth L Covington
{"title":"Quantifying the Risk of Technology-Driven Health Disparities in Radiation Oncology.","authors":"Alexander Moncion, Alex K Bryant, Carlos E Cardenas, Kathryn J Dess, Maria N Ditman, Charles S Mayo, Michelle L Mierzwa, Kelly C Paradis, Dennis N Stanley, Elizabeth L Covington","doi":"10.1016/j.prro.2024.06.009","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>New technologies are continuously emerging in radiation oncology. Inherent technological limitations can result in health care disparities in vulnerable patient populations. These limitations must be considered for existing and new technologies in the clinic to provide equitable care.</p><p><strong>Materials and methods: </strong>We created a health disparity risk assessment metric inspired by failure mode and effects analysis. We provide sample patient populations and their potential associated disparities, guidelines for clinics and vendors, and example applications of the methodology.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A disparity risk priority number can be calculated from the product of 3 quantifiable metrics: the percentage of patients impacted, the severity of the impact of dosimetric uncertainty or quality of the radiation plan, and the clinical dependence on the evaluated technology. The disparity risk priority number can be used to rank the risk of suboptimal care due to technical limitations when comparing technologies and to plan interventions when technology is shown to have inequitable performance in the patient population of a clinic.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>The proposed methodology may simplify the evaluation of how new technology impacts vulnerable populations, help clinics quantify the limitations of their technological resources, and plan appropriate interventions to improve equity in radiation treatments.</p>","PeriodicalId":54245,"journal":{"name":"Practical Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Practical Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prro.2024.06.009","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ONCOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: New technologies are continuously emerging in radiation oncology. Inherent technological limitations can result in health care disparities in vulnerable patient populations. These limitations must be considered for existing and new technologies in the clinic to provide equitable care.

Materials and methods: We created a health disparity risk assessment metric inspired by failure mode and effects analysis. We provide sample patient populations and their potential associated disparities, guidelines for clinics and vendors, and example applications of the methodology.

Results: A disparity risk priority number can be calculated from the product of 3 quantifiable metrics: the percentage of patients impacted, the severity of the impact of dosimetric uncertainty or quality of the radiation plan, and the clinical dependence on the evaluated technology. The disparity risk priority number can be used to rank the risk of suboptimal care due to technical limitations when comparing technologies and to plan interventions when technology is shown to have inequitable performance in the patient population of a clinic.

Conclusions: The proposed methodology may simplify the evaluation of how new technology impacts vulnerable populations, help clinics quantify the limitations of their technological resources, and plan appropriate interventions to improve equity in radiation treatments.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
量化技术驱动的差异风险。
目的:放射肿瘤学领域的新技术不断涌现。固有的技术局限性会导致弱势患者群体在医疗保健方面的差异。为了提供公平的医疗服务,必须考虑到临床中现有技术和新技术的这些局限性:我们受故障模式与影响分析(FMEA)的启发,创建了一个健康差异风险评估指标。我们提供了样本患者人群及其潜在的相关差异、诊所和供应商指南以及该方法的应用实例:结果:差异风险优先级编号(dRPN)可由三个可量化指标的乘积计算得出:受影响患者的百分比(P)、剂量测定不确定性或辐射计划质量影响的严重程度(S)以及临床对评估技术的依赖程度(C)。在比较各种技术时,dRPN 可用来排序因技术限制而导致护理效果不理想的风险,当发现某种技术在诊所的患者群体中表现不公平时,还可用来规划干预措施:建议的方法可简化对新技术如何影响弱势群体的评估,帮助诊所量化其技术资源的局限性,并规划适当的干预措施以改善放射治疗的公平性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Practical Radiation Oncology
Practical Radiation Oncology Medicine-Radiology, Nuclear Medicine and Imaging
CiteScore
5.20
自引率
6.10%
发文量
177
审稿时长
34 days
期刊介绍: The overarching mission of Practical Radiation Oncology is to improve the quality of radiation oncology practice. PRO''s purpose is to document the state of current practice, providing background for those in training and continuing education for practitioners, through discussion and illustration of new techniques, evaluation of current practices, and publication of case reports. PRO strives to provide its readers content that emphasizes knowledge "with a purpose." The content of PRO includes: Original articles focusing on patient safety, quality measurement, or quality improvement initiatives Original articles focusing on imaging, contouring, target delineation, simulation, treatment planning, immobilization, organ motion, and other practical issues ASTRO guidelines, position papers, and consensus statements Essays that highlight enriching personal experiences in caring for cancer patients and their families.
期刊最新文献
Centralized Quality Assurance of Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for the Veterans Affairs Cooperative Studies Program Study Number 2005: A Phase 3 Randomized Trial of Lung Cancer Surgery or Stereotactic Radiotherapy for Operable Early-Stage Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (VALOR). Comprehensive Clinical Usability-oriented Contour Quality Evaluation for Deep learning Auto-segmentation: Combining Multiple Quantitative Metrics through Machine Learning. Radiosurgery Society Case-Based Guide to Stereotactic Body Radiation Therapy for Challenging Cases of Spinal Metastases. Table of Contents Editorial Board
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1