Feature | January 13, 2015

Survey Indicates Positive Experience, Desire for More Guidelines to Improve Peer Review Process

Study analyzes results of peer review survey conducted by ASTRO in 2013

January 13, 2015 — A 2013 survey of radiation oncologists indicates that they would like more formal recommendations and guidance in order to improve the peer review process, according to a study published in the January-February 2015 issue of Practical Radiation Oncology (PRO), the clinical practice journal of the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO).  

The study, “Practice patterns for peer review in radiation oncology,” analyzed the results of a radiation oncology-specific, peer review survey conducted by ASTRO in 2013. The goal of the survey was to describe the frequency and content of peer review activities; to determine which peer review functions directly evaluate medical decision-making and technical expertise; to conduct an exploratory analysis of factors and demographics that impact peer review and to determine ASTRO’s physician members’ interest in additional guidance on peer review.

Designed by ASTRO’s Health Services Research Committee, the survey included eight demographic and 25 peer or practice review questions. The survey was distributed to all of ASTRO’s physician members and members-in-training worldwide (n=5,674). Of the 572 respondents, 93 percent (532) were practicing radiation oncologists and 7 percent (40) were residents, trainees or other. The respondents were divided evenly between academic and private practices or other. Seventy-eight percent (446) of respondents were from the United States; 5 percent (29) were from Canada and 17 percent (97) were from other countries.

Eighty-three percent (475) of respondents reported being involved in peer review and 75 percent (435) of respondents were comfortable with their practice’s current peer review program. Eleven percent (63) of respondents reported being uncomfortable with their program and 6 percent (40) responded that their working environment did not encourage peer review.

Respondents were asked when peer review was conducted at their institution. The results demonstrated that respondents were involved in peer review either during the first week of treatment or prior to initiation of treatment. Eighty-three percent (475) performed peer review during the first week of radiation therapy treatment and 65 percent (372) were involved in peer review prior to the beginning of treatment, also known as prospective peer review.

Respondents were asked what, if any, changes to patient case management were made as a result of peer review. Eighty-seven percent (498) of respondents made changes to fractionation; 82 percent (469) made adjustments to dose; 70 percent (400) altered contouring and 49 percent (280) altered the treatment intent. Physicians reported that 7 to 10 percent of patient cases were changed as a result of the peer review process.

Finally, respondents were asked if they supported the development of additional recommendations and guidance on peer review. Seventy-four percent (423) of respondents expressed interest in formal guidelines and recommendations from ASTRO to strengthen and improve the peer review process.

“Peer review is an important quality assurance process that facilitates physicians in constructively evaluating each other’s work, and our survey focused on medical decision making and technical expertise,” said David J. Hoopes, M.D., lead author of the study and a radiation oncologist at the Joint Radiation Oncology Center at Travis Air Force Base in Travis, California. “This study confirms that peer review is a common practice, however, there is wide variation in how it is performed. Additional research and evaluation of peer review are necessary to provide formal recommendations and guidance, including tools and workflow, to improve peer review processes, which will ultimately improve the efficacy and safety of radiation therapy for our patients.”

For more information: www.astro.org

 

 

Related Content

Henry Ford Hospital's ViewRay MRIdian linear accelerator system allows real-time MRI-guided radiotherapy. Shown is the support staff for this system. In the center of the photo is Benjamin Movsas, M.D., chair of radiation oncology at Henry Ford Cancer Institute. Second from the right is Carrie Glide-Hurst, Ph.D., director of translational research, radiation oncology.

Henry Ford Hospital's ViewRay MRIdian linear accelerator system allows real-time MRI-guided radiotherapy. Shown is the support staff for this system. In the center of the photo is Benjamin Movsas, M.D., chair of radiation oncology at Henry Ford Cancer Institute. Second from the right is Carri Glide-Hurst, Ph.D., director of translational research, radiation oncology.

Feature | Henry Ford Hospital | May 21, 2019 | Dave Fornell, Editor
Henry Ford Hospital thought leaders regularly speak at the radiation oncology and radiology conferences about new res
Varian Acquiring Cancer Treatment Services International
News | Radiation Therapy | May 21, 2019
Varian Medical Systems announced it has entered into a definitive agreement to acquire India’s Cancer Treatment...
Videos | Radiation Therapy | May 21, 2019
This is a walk through of the ViewRay MRIdian MRI-guided radiotherapy system installed at ...
Partial Breast Irradiation Effective, Convenient Treatment Option for Low-Risk Breast Cancer
News | Radiation Therapy | May 20, 2019
Partial breast irradiation produces similar long-term survival rates and risk for recurrence compared with whole breast...
New Method Improves Ability to Measure and Maximize Radiation Therapy Dose
News | Radiation Therapy | May 14, 2019
Delivering just the right dose of radiation for cancer patients is a delicate balance in their treatment regime....
Sponsored Content | Videos | Radiation Oncology | May 13, 2019
At ASTRO 2018, Accuray showcased new patient-fi
Radiotherapy After Chemo May Improve Survival in Advanced Hodgkin's Lymphoma Patients
News | Radiation Therapy | May 10, 2019
Patients with advanced Hodgkin's lymphoma who have large tumors at the time of diagnosis may benefit from radiotherapy...
IBA Partnering to Develop Advanced Digital Proton Therapy Technologies in Belgium
News | Proton Therapy | May 10, 2019
IBA (Ion Beam Applications SA) announced a research agreement with Skandionkliniken, Université Catholique de Louvain...
A CyberHeart cardiac ablation radiotherapy treatment plan showing where the radiation beam will ablate for a noninvasive pulmonary vein isolation procedure. Varian acquires, buys, purchases Cyberheart.

A CyberHeart cardiac ablation radiotherapy treatment plan showing where the radiation beams will ablate for a noninvasive pulmonary vein isolation procedure to treat an arrhythmia.

Feature | Radiation Therapy | May 10, 2019
May 10, 2019 — Radiation oncology vendor Varian announced it acquired the start-up company CyberHeart, which has deve