Kitty Chan , Biu Chan , Kelly Linden , Darby Erler , Laura D'Alimonte , Vickie Kong , Julie Kraus , Nicole Harnett
{"title":"框架开发:用于 CSRT 工作量量化的高级放射治疗活动的标准化定义","authors":"Kitty Chan , Biu Chan , Kelly Linden , Darby Erler , Laura D'Alimonte , Vickie Kong , Julie Kraus , Nicole Harnett","doi":"10.1016/j.tipsro.2024.100238","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Advanced practice (AP) in radiation therapy (RT) is being implemented around the globe. In an effort to advance the understanding of the similarities and differences in APRT roles in Ontario, Canada, a community of practice (CoP) sought ways to provide quantitative data on the nature of APRT clinical activities and the frequency with which these activities were being executed.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In 2017, a consensus building project involving 20 APRTs and 14 radiation therapy (RT) department managers in Ontario was completed to establish a mechanism to quantify APRTs’ clinical impact. In Round 1 & 2, expert feedback was gathered to generate an Advanced Practice (AP) Activity List. In Round 3: 20 APRTs completed an online survey to assess the importance and applicability of each AP Activity to their role using Likert scale (0–5). A final AP Activity List & Definitions was generated.</p></div><div><h3>Results & discussion</h3><p>Round 1: Forty-seven AP activities were identified. Round 2: 3/14 RT managers provided 145 feedback statements on Round 1 AP Activity List. The working group used RT managers’ feedback to clarify AP activities and definitions, specifically merging 33 unique AP activities to create 11 inclusive AP activities and eliminating 8 activities identified from Round 1. The most inclusive AP activity created was #1 New Patient Consultation, this AP Activity is merged from 7 unique AP activities. Incorporating RT managers’ feedback with the internal AP clinical workload lists from 2 Ontario cancer centres resulted in a revised AP Activity List with 20 AP inclusive activities. Round 3: 14/20 APRTs provided Likert scores on this revised list. The most applicable AP activities (mean score) were #16 Technical Consultation (4.0), #15 Contouring Target Volume (3.8) and #2 Planning Consultation (3.8); the least applicable was #18 MR Applicator Assessment (0.9).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This is the first systematic attempt to build consensus on AP clinical activities. Non-clinical APRT activities related to research, education, innovation, and program development were not in the scope of this project.<!--> <!-->The Final AP Activity List & Definitions serves as a framework that allows standardized and continuous monitoring of AP clinical activities and impact.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":36328,"journal":{"name":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000052/pdfft?md5=4df7790d7d0d03f6c077bc3a2b682faa&pid=1-s2.0-S2405632424000052-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Framework Development: Standardizing Definition of Advanced Practice Radiation Therapy Activities for Clinical Workload Quantification\",\"authors\":\"Kitty Chan , Biu Chan , Kelly Linden , Darby Erler , Laura D'Alimonte , Vickie Kong , Julie Kraus , Nicole Harnett\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.tipsro.2024.100238\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>Advanced practice (AP) in radiation therapy (RT) is being implemented around the globe. In an effort to advance the understanding of the similarities and differences in APRT roles in Ontario, Canada, a community of practice (CoP) sought ways to provide quantitative data on the nature of APRT clinical activities and the frequency with which these activities were being executed.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>In 2017, a consensus building project involving 20 APRTs and 14 radiation therapy (RT) department managers in Ontario was completed to establish a mechanism to quantify APRTs’ clinical impact. In Round 1 & 2, expert feedback was gathered to generate an Advanced Practice (AP) Activity List. In Round 3: 20 APRTs completed an online survey to assess the importance and applicability of each AP Activity to their role using Likert scale (0–5). A final AP Activity List & Definitions was generated.</p></div><div><h3>Results & discussion</h3><p>Round 1: Forty-seven AP activities were identified. Round 2: 3/14 RT managers provided 145 feedback statements on Round 1 AP Activity List. The working group used RT managers’ feedback to clarify AP activities and definitions, specifically merging 33 unique AP activities to create 11 inclusive AP activities and eliminating 8 activities identified from Round 1. The most inclusive AP activity created was #1 New Patient Consultation, this AP Activity is merged from 7 unique AP activities. Incorporating RT managers’ feedback with the internal AP clinical workload lists from 2 Ontario cancer centres resulted in a revised AP Activity List with 20 AP inclusive activities. Round 3: 14/20 APRTs provided Likert scores on this revised list. The most applicable AP activities (mean score) were #16 Technical Consultation (4.0), #15 Contouring Target Volume (3.8) and #2 Planning Consultation (3.8); the least applicable was #18 MR Applicator Assessment (0.9).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>This is the first systematic attempt to build consensus on AP clinical activities. Non-clinical APRT activities related to research, education, innovation, and program development were not in the scope of this project.<!--> <!-->The Final AP Activity List & Definitions serves as a framework that allows standardized and continuous monitoring of AP clinical activities and impact.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":36328,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-01-17\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000052/pdfft?md5=4df7790d7d0d03f6c077bc3a2b682faa&pid=1-s2.0-S2405632424000052-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000052\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"Nursing\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technical Innovations and Patient Support in Radiation Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405632424000052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"Nursing","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的 放射治疗(RT)高级实践(APR)正在全球范围内实施。为了促进对加拿大安大略省 APRT 角色异同的了解,一个实践社区(CoP)寻求提供有关 APRT 临床活动性质和这些活动执行频率的量化数据的方法。2017 年,一个由安大略省 20 名 APRT 和 14 名放射治疗(RT)部门经理参与的建立共识项目完成,以建立一个量化 APRT 临床影响的机制。在第 1 & 2 轮中,收集了专家的反馈意见,以生成高级实践(APR)活动清单。第 3 轮:20 名 APRT 完成了一项在线调查,使用李克特量表(0-5)评估每项 AP 活动对其角色的重要性和适用性。结果与讨论第一轮:确定了 47 项 AP 活动。第 2 轮:3/14 位 RT 经理就第 1 轮 AP 活动清单提供了 145 条反馈意见。工作小组利用 RT 经理的反馈澄清了 AP 活动和定义,特别是合并了 33 个独特的 AP 活动,创建了 11 个包容性 AP 活动,并删除了第一轮中确定的 8 个活动。 创建的包容性最强的 AP 活动是 #1 新病人咨询,该 AP 活动由 7 个独特的 AP 活动合并而成。将 RT 经理的反馈意见与安大略省 2 个癌症中心的内部 AP 临床工作量清单相结合,修订了 AP 活动清单,其中包含 20 项 AP 活动。第 3 轮:14/20 名 APRT 对修订后的清单进行了 Likert 评分。最适用的 AP 活动(平均分)是 #16 技术咨询(4.0)、#15 靶体积轮廓塑造(3.8)和 #2 计划咨询(3.8);最不适用的是 #18 MR 施用器评估(0.9)。与研究、教育、创新和项目开发相关的非临床 APRT 活动不在本项目范围内。最终的 AP 活动列表及amp; 定义可作为一个框架,对 AP 临床活动和影响进行标准化和持续的监控。
Framework Development: Standardizing Definition of Advanced Practice Radiation Therapy Activities for Clinical Workload Quantification
Purpose
Advanced practice (AP) in radiation therapy (RT) is being implemented around the globe. In an effort to advance the understanding of the similarities and differences in APRT roles in Ontario, Canada, a community of practice (CoP) sought ways to provide quantitative data on the nature of APRT clinical activities and the frequency with which these activities were being executed.
Methods
In 2017, a consensus building project involving 20 APRTs and 14 radiation therapy (RT) department managers in Ontario was completed to establish a mechanism to quantify APRTs’ clinical impact. In Round 1 & 2, expert feedback was gathered to generate an Advanced Practice (AP) Activity List. In Round 3: 20 APRTs completed an online survey to assess the importance and applicability of each AP Activity to their role using Likert scale (0–5). A final AP Activity List & Definitions was generated.
Results & discussion
Round 1: Forty-seven AP activities were identified. Round 2: 3/14 RT managers provided 145 feedback statements on Round 1 AP Activity List. The working group used RT managers’ feedback to clarify AP activities and definitions, specifically merging 33 unique AP activities to create 11 inclusive AP activities and eliminating 8 activities identified from Round 1. The most inclusive AP activity created was #1 New Patient Consultation, this AP Activity is merged from 7 unique AP activities. Incorporating RT managers’ feedback with the internal AP clinical workload lists from 2 Ontario cancer centres resulted in a revised AP Activity List with 20 AP inclusive activities. Round 3: 14/20 APRTs provided Likert scores on this revised list. The most applicable AP activities (mean score) were #16 Technical Consultation (4.0), #15 Contouring Target Volume (3.8) and #2 Planning Consultation (3.8); the least applicable was #18 MR Applicator Assessment (0.9).
Conclusions
This is the first systematic attempt to build consensus on AP clinical activities. Non-clinical APRT activities related to research, education, innovation, and program development were not in the scope of this project. The Final AP Activity List & Definitions serves as a framework that allows standardized and continuous monitoring of AP clinical activities and impact.