What Program Directors Think About Resident Education: Results of the 2023 Spring Survey of the Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) Part II

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES

The Association of Program Directors in Radiology (APDR) administers an annual survey to assess issues and experiences related to residency program management and education. Response data from the 2023 survey provides insights on the impact of COVID-19 on resident recruitment (Part I) and education (Part II), which can be used to facilitate planning and resource allocation for the evolving needs of programs and their leadership.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An observational, cross-sectional study of the APDR membership was performed using a web-based survey consisting of 45 questions, 12 of which pertain to resident education in the post-pandemic era and are discussed in Part II of a two-part survey analysis. All active APDR members (n = 393) were invited to participate in the survey.

RESULTS

The response rate was 32% (124 of 393). Results were tallied using Qualtrics software and qualitative responses were tabulated or summarized as comments.

CONCLUSIONS

The primary challenges to resident education are faculty burnout, rising case volumes, and remote instruction. However, most program leaders report that in-person readouts are much more common than remote readouts. The ability to offer both in-person and remote AIRP sessions is viewed positively. Most program leaders require Authorized User certification, although many do not think all residents need it. Assessment of procedural competence varies by the type of procedure and is similar to graduates' self-assessment of competence.

Establishing a robust radioligand therapy program: A practical approach for North American centers

Radioligand therapy (RLT) is a targeted approach to treating cancer that has been shown to be safe and effective in a variety of disease states, including gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumors, lymphoma, and most recently, advanced prostate cancer. In the United States, patient access to this therapy is currently variable. Implementation of new RLT programs and expansion of existing programs are needed to broaden patient access to and standardize the delivery of RLT, especially as new therapies are introduced into clinical practice. Drawing from experience in establishing RLT programs in different settings, we have developed practical recommendations for building and implementing a robust RLT program. In this review, we present our recommendations for minimal requirements and optimal requirements, as well as system considerations, and special issues associated with implementing an RLT program in North American centers.

Incorporating radioligand therapy in clinical practice in the United States for patients with prostate cancer

Prostate cancer (PC) is the second most commonly diagnosed cancer in the United States. Advanced PC evolves to metastatic castration-resistant PC (mCRPC). Theranostics combining prostate-specific membrane antigen-targeted positron emission tomography imaging and radioligand therapy (RLT) represents a precision medicine approach to PC treatment. With the recent approval of lutetium Lu 177 (¹⁷⁷Lu) vipivotide tetraxetan for men with mCRPC, the utilization of RLT will increase. In this review, we suggest a framework for incorporating RLT for PC into clinical practice. A search of PubMed and Google Scholar was performed using keywords related to PC, RLT, prostate-specific membrane antigen, and novel RLT centers. The authors also provided opinions based on their clinical experience. The setup and operation of an RLT center requires the diligence and cooperation of a well-trained multidisciplinary team committed to patient safety and clinical efficacy. Administrative systems should ensure that treatment scheduling, reimbursement, and patient monitoring are efficient. For optimal outcomes, the clinical care team must have an organizational plan that delineates the full range of required tasks. Establishing new RLT centers for treatment of PC is possible with appropriate multidisciplinary planning. We provide an overview of the key elements to consider when establishing a safe, efficient, and high-quality RLT center.

Clinical Best Practices for Radiation Safety During Lutetium-177 Therapy

IMPORTANCE

177 Lu therapy as part of theranostic treatment for cancer is expanding but it can be a challenge for sites with limited radiation protection staff to implement the radiation safety program required for therapeutic nuclear medicine.

OBJECTIVE

To increase the adoption of 177 Lu therapy, especially in smaller centers and clinics, by providing a collection of radiation safety best practices and operational experience. To provide a resource for radiation safety officers supporting the implementation of a 177 Lu therapy program.

METHODS

A panel of 11 radiation safety professionals representing sites across Canada and the United States with experience delivering 177 Lu therapy was assembled and discussed their responses to a list of questions focused on the following radiation safety topics: facility layout and design; radiation safety program; and drug management and patient care.

RESULTS

A comprehensive set of best practice guidelines for clinical radiation safety during 177 Lu therapy has been developed based on the collective operational experience of a group of radiation safety professionals. Significant findings included that 177 Lu therapy is often safely administered in unshielded rooms, that staff radiation exposure associated with 177 Lu therapy is minimal relative to other nuclear medicine programs, and that some relatively simple preparation in advance including papering of common surfaces and planning for incontinence can effectively control contamination during therapy.

CONCLUSION

The guidance contained in this paper will assist radiation safety professionals in the implementation of safe, effective 177 Lu therapy programs, even at smaller sites with limited to no experience in therapeutic nuclear medicine.