Promoting a research culture among junior radiation oncologists: outcomes from the introduction of the Australian and New Zealand research requirement in training

AIM

Since 2005, radiation oncology trainees in Australia and New Zealand have had to undertake a piece of original research during training, and submit a manuscript, as first author, for senior peer-review. Satisfactory completion of this requirement is one component of eligibility to sit the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists Fellowship examinations. The purpose of this study was to examine the value of this curriculum requirement, including the publication rates and potential barriers to trainee research.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

An online survey was sent to 116 radiation oncologists/trainees who trained since the mandatory research requirement was introduced (2005-2011). Questions concerned research topics, publications, subsequent research activity, perceptions on barriers to research and aids to conducting research during training. A web-based search of PubMed by author name was carried out to complete and verify publication statistics.

RESULTS

In total, 108 (93.1%) of the 116 trainees across 20 centres who submitted their research papers to the Radiation Oncology Faculty Research Committee were successful in meeting the required standard first time. Half of these trainees ultimately published their paper in a peer-reviewed journal. Of trainees responding to the survey, 62% presented their research at a scientific meeting. Most of the studies were either retrospective (62.3%) or dosimetry/physics projects (10.1%). The main problems encountered in conducting projects were competing clinical commitments and lack of dedicated research time. Notably, long ethics approval processes, lack of supervision and statistical support for projects were not considered barriers.

CONCLUSION

This mandatory research requirement ensures trainees initiate and complete at least one project during their training. Since the introduction of this curriculum component, half of the research projects have resulted in publication in a peer-reviewed journal. Increased 'protected time' and training in scientific writing and methods may improve publication rates and quality. This first review of the Australian and New Zealand radiation oncology trainee research requirement highlights areas that need to be addressed to further support and foster a research culture among junior radiation oncologists.

Comparison of a Commonwealth-initiated regional radiation oncology facility in Toowoomba with a Queensland Health facility

The aim was to compare a private Commonwealth-initiated regional radiation oncology facility in Toowoomba with a Queensland Health facility (QHF) in Brisbane. The comparison concentrated on staffing, case mix and operational budgets, but was not able to look at changes in access to services. Data were collected from the two facilities from January 2008 to June 2008 inclusive. A number of factors were compared, including case mix, staffing levels, delay times for treatment, research, training and treatment costs. The case mix between the two areas was similar with curative treatments making up just over half the work load in both centres and two-thirds the work being made up of cancers of breast and prostate. Staffing levels were leaner in Toowoomba, especially in the areas of nursing, administration and trial coordinators. Research activity was slightly higher in Toowoomba. The average medicare cost per treatment course was similar in both centres ($5000 per course). Total costs of an average treatment including patient, State and Commonwealth costs, showed a 30% difference in costing favouring Toowoomba. This regional radiation oncology centre has provided state-of-the-art cancer care that is close to home for patients living in the Darling Downs region. Both public and private patients have been treated with modest costs to the patient and significant savings to QH. The case mix is similar to the QHF, and there has been significant activity in clinical research. A paperless working environment is one factor that has allowed staffing levels to be reduced. Ongoing support from Governments are required if private facilities are to participate in important ongoing staff training.

Australian and New Zealand three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy consensus guidelines for prostate cancer

Three-dimensional conformal radiation therapy (3DCRT) has been shown to reduce normal tissue toxicity and allow dose escalation in the curative treatment of prostate cancer. The Faculty of Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group initiated a consensus process to generate evidence-based guidelines for the safe and effective implementation of 3DCRT. All radiation oncology departments in Australia and New Zealand were invited to complete a survey of their prostate practice and to send representatives to a consensus workshop. After a review of the evidence, key issues were identified and debated. If agreement was not reached, working parties were formed to make recommendations. Draft guidelines were circulated to workshop participants for approval prior to publication. Where possible, evidence-based recommendations have been made with regard to patient selection, risk stratification, simulation, planning, treatment delivery and toxicity reporting. This is the first time a group of radiation therapists, physicists and oncologists representing professional radiotherapy practice across Australia and New Zealand have worked together to develop best-practice guidelines. These guidelines should serve as a baseline for prospective clinical trials, outcome research and quality assurance.

Three-dimensional conformal radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer in Australia and New Zealand: Report on a survey of radiotherapy centres and the proceedings of a consensus workshop

There is an increasing use of 3-D conformal radiotherapy (3DCRT) in the radiotherapeutic management of prostate cancer. The Faculty of Radiation Oncology Genito-Urinary Group carried out a survey of Australian and New Zealand radiotherapy centres in the preparation of a consensus workshop. Of the 19 centres that were represented, there were 24 radiation oncologists, 16 radiation therapists and 12 medical physicists. The survey collected demographic information and data on the practices undertaken at those centres when delivering curative radiotherapy in the treatment of prostate cancer. There was much variation in the delivery of treatment in the areas of patient set-up, contouring of target volumes and organs of interest during computer planning, the techniques and the dose constraints used in these techniques, the use of adjuvant androgen deprivation therapy and the quality assurance processes used in monitoring effects of treatment. This variability reflects the range of data in the published literature. Emerging trends of practices were also identified. This is a first report on a multi-disciplinary approach to the development of guidelines in 3DCRT of prostate cancer.