No abstract

No abstract

3.0] Z minor modifications of PTV, OARs, WD, or a prescription/CP mismatch, and C [2.0] Z incomplete contours, significant contour modifications, prescription changes, or laterality modifications). All grades were prospectively recorded on an electronic whiteboard. As were cleared for planning, Bs were cleared for planning once remediated, and Cs were re-presented at CR upon remediation. Information was pooled to determine physician performance by assigning a grade point average (GPA). Results: Two thousand seven hundred thirty-nine treatment plans from 2358 patients were reviewed using the PES from September 2013 to February 2015. Thirteen physicians were evaluated and an average of 7 cases were reviewed per day; 33% (nZ684) of plans required modifications before treatment planning commenced. The breakdown of grades was 67% As, 22% Bs and 11% Cs.Purpose/Objective(s): Patients contact their radiation oncologists afterhours regarding a variety of questions and concerns; however, the provider on-call is often not the patient's primary radiation oncologist. This introduces the opportunity for breakdowns in communication and medical errors. Little is known about the volume of, reasons for, and response to night and weekend patient telephone calls. This study analyzed after-hours Volume 93 Number 3S Supplement 2015 Poster Viewing Session E497

Our journey toward becoming an HRO has led to the development of a robust SC through a comprehensive safety framework. Our multifaceted initiatives, focusing on culture and system changes, can be successfully implemented in a large academic radiation oncology department to yield measurable improvements in SC and outcomes.