» Articles » PMID: 39444414

From Novice to Expert: Reducing Breast Imaging Rejection Rates Through Physician Mentorship in Advanced Practice Radiation Therapy

Overview
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

Purpose: The study's goal was to evaluate the impact of a Radiation Oncologist (RO)-Radiation Therapist (RTT) mentorship on image approval rates for a breast population undergoing radiation therapy in a high-volume practice. The mentorship was undertaken within a large health system in partial fulfillment of the Expert Practice Module for a Masters (MSc) in Advanced Practice Radiotherapy and Oncology.

Methods: Images were retrieved from the MOSAIQ EMR on breast diagnostic code. 1,295 images/115 patients were reviewed pre-mentorship (October 2019-March 2020) and compared with 1,047 images/91patients during/post-mentorship (April 2020-September 2020). The Anderson-Gill (AG) model was used to estimate the hazard ratio for image rejection. Rejected images were classified by reason and compared using Fisher's exact test. Concordance data (RO/RTT image rejection) were collected during Phase Three of the mentorship.

Results: Of 115 patients assessed pre-mentorship, 16 (14 %) had at least 1 image rejected at any session. Of 91 patients assessed post-mentorship, 8 (9 %) had at least 1 image rejected. Likelihood of image rejection decreased by 54 %, with a hazard ratio of 0.46 [95 % CI: 0.24, 0.88]; p = 0.0195. Reasons for image rejection differed pre- and post-mentorship. Poor imaging technique accounted for rejection of 9 of 24 images (37.5 %) before compared to 0 of 11 images (0 %) post-mentorship. Other reasons for image rejection: depth at isocenter (25 % pre-mentorship; 18 % post-mentorship), supraclavicular medial border position (12.5 % vs. 9.09 %), isocenter location (12.5 % vs. 0 %), arm position (4.17 % vs. 54.55 %); hip alignment (8.33 % vs. 18.18 %). Concordance rate was 100 %.

Conclusions: The mentorship proved successful in elevating the RTT's skills and image approval rates, while contributing to improvements in departmental imaging best practices.

References
1.
Costin I, Marcu L . Factors impacting on patient setup analysis and error management during breast cancer radiotherapy. Crit Rev Oncol Hematol. 2022; 178:103798. DOI: 10.1016/j.critrevonc.2022.103798. View

2.
Harnett N, Bak K, Zychla L, Gutierrez E, Warde P . Defining advanced practice in radiation therapy: A feasibility assessment of a new healthcare provider role in Ontario, Canada. Radiography (Lond). 2019; 25(3):241-249. DOI: 10.1016/j.radi.2019.02.007. View

3.
Coleman K, Jasperse M, Herst P, Yielder J . Establishing radiation therapy advanced practice in New Zealand. J Med Radiat Sci. 2015; 61(1):38-44. PMC: 4175832. DOI: 10.1002/jmrs.33. View

4.
Joe M, Cusano A, Leckie J, Czuczman N, Exner K, Yong H . Mentorship Programs in Residency: A Scoping Review. J Grad Med Educ. 2023; 15(2):190-200. PMC: 10150829. DOI: 10.4300/JGME-D-22-00415.1. View

5.
Wong S, Sin S, Lim L, Nurul Tassha B, Lin J, Melissa K . The implementation of an advanced practice radiation therapy (APRT) program in Singapore. Tech Innov Patient Support Radiat Oncol. 2021; 17:63-70. PMC: 8111035. DOI: 10.1016/j.tipsro.2021.02.002. View