Defining the Elements for Successful Implementation of a Small-City Radiotherapy Department

Craighead, Peter; Dunscombe, Peter

doi:10.3747/co.v18i3.741

Cited by 7 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 16 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This study follows one published by Craighead et al in Current Oncology in 2011, which looked at the elements required for smaller cities to successfully implement radiotherapy [ 3 ]. It suggested that the following drivers were critical for successful implementation: a tangible connection between regional and tertiary centers; selecting cities with a sufficient population to justify two linear accelerator departments; and ensuring manpower issues were proactively addressed.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Has Radiotherapy Been Successfully Implemented in Alberta’s Small Cities? A Review of Alberta’s Regional Cancer Centre Network from 2010–2020

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The expansion of cancer services closer to home has become a major focus of publicly funded healthcare, with cancer organizations attempting to invest in smaller centers by integrating radiotherapy into these facilities. In Canada this has resulted in Ontario, British Columbia and Alberta investing in 12 expanded regional centers over the past 20 years. Quebec, Manitoba and Nova Scotia have made similar investments. Alberta’s three new centers opened in 2010, 2013 and 2021 (projected). This study examined improvements in wait times and patient throughput between 2010 and 2020, and highlighted strategies that will support the sustainability and growth of clinical activity through to 2030. Significant improvement in ready to treat wait times for radiotherapy have resulted from opening two centers, and the provincial throughput for patients requiring systemic or radiotherapy has gone up by 16%. A patient satisfaction survey demonstrated that rural patients are happy with their care and desire the provision of more of their cancer treatment closer to home. An expert panel provided recommendations on what needs to be done to stabilize recruitment and retention.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Has Radiotherapy Been Successfully Implemented in Alberta’s Small Cities? A Review of Alberta’s Regional Cancer Centre Network from 2010–2020

et al. 2021

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Optimal Location of Radiation Therapy Centers With Respect to Geographic Access

Santibáñez

Gaudet

French

et al. 2014

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Association Between Geographic Access to Cancer Care and Receipt of Radiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer

Lin

Bruinooge

Kirkwood

et al. 2016

International Journal of Radiation Oncology*Biology*Physics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose Trimodality therapy (chemoradiation and surgery) is standard of care for Stage II/III rectal cancer but nearly one third of patients do not receive radiation therapy (RT). We examined the relationship between density of radiation oncologist and travel distance to receipt of RT. Materials/Methods A retrospective study based on the National Cancer Data Base identified 26,845 patients aged 18–80 with Stage II/III rectal cancer diagnosed between 2007–2010. Radiation oncologists were identified through Physician Compare Dataset. Generalized Estimating Equations clustering by Hospital Service Area was utilized to examine the association between geographic access and receipt of RT, controlling for patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics. Results 70% of patients received RT within 180 days of diagnosis or within 90 days of surgery. Compared to travel distance <12.5 miles, patients diagnosed at reporting facility who traveled ≥50 miles had a decreased likelihood of receipt of RT (50–249 miles: adjusted Odds Ratio [aOR] 0.75, p<.001; ≥250 miles: aOR 0.46, p=.002), all else being equal. Density level of radiation oncologists was not significantly associated with receipt of RT. Patients who were female, nonwhites, ≥50 years, and with comorbidities were less likely to receive RT (p<.05). Patients who were uninsured but self-paid for their medical services, initially diagnosed elsewhere but treated at reporting facility, and resided in Midwest had increased likelihood of receipt of RT (p<.05). Conclusions Increased travel burden was associated with a decreased likelihood of receiving RT for stage II/III rectal cancer patients when all else being equal, but radiation oncologist density was not. Further research in geographic access and establishing transportation assistance programs, or lodging services for patients with unmet need may help decrease geographic barriers and improve the quality of rectal cancer care.

show abstract

Defining the Elements for Successful Implementation of a Small-City Radiotherapy Department

Abstract: practice. We recommend such an approach to jurisdictions that are considering devolved radiotherapy.

Cited by 7 publications

References 16 publications

Has Radiotherapy Been Successfully Implemented in Alberta’s Small Cities? A Review of Alberta’s Regional Cancer Centre Network from 2010–2020

Has Radiotherapy Been Successfully Implemented in Alberta’s Small Cities? A Review of Alberta’s Regional Cancer Centre Network from 2010–2020

Optimal Location of Radiation Therapy Centers With Respect to Geographic Access

Association Between Geographic Access to Cancer Care and Receipt of Radiation Therapy for Rectal Cancer

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About