Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2010 workforce survey

Leung, John; Vukolova, Natalia

doi:10.1111/j.1754-9485.2011.02316.x

Cited by 22 publications

(45 citation statements)

References 2 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The trainee part of the census has revealed remarkable similarities to the 2014 census . Trainee numbers have stabilised, with 140 in this census compared to 142 in 2014 and 143 in 2010 . There was concern that numbers may drop because of concerns of oversupply in the workforce but, as mentioned previously, over 90% of recent graduates are finding employment .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

“…However, a recent study has revealed over 90% of recent graduates in ANZ and Singapore were employed with over half of them employed as consultants . All three censuses this century have also revealed low unemployment amongst radiation oncologists in general with 1.3% unemployed in this census compared to 1.5% in 2014 and 2.6% in 2010 …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…This is the sixth Faculty of Radiation Oncology workforce census and the fourth one this century . A separate New Zealand analysis was also published in 2015, and a planned separate New Zealand analysis will follow this census.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Introduction This paper reports the key findings of the Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census and compares results with previous studies. Methods The census was conducted in mid‐2018 with distribution to all radiation oncologists and trainees listed on the college database in Australia, New Zealand, Singapore and overseas. There were new questions about hours spent on multidisciplinary meetings (MDTS), leadership positions held, management of inpatients, hypofractionation, stereotactic body radiation therapy (SBRT), income type and gynae‐oncology work for radiation oncologists. Trainees were asked about time spent on planning and contouring. Results The overall response rate was 69.9% with 67.7% of radiation oncologists and 77.9% of trainees responding. There were 514 radiation oncologists with 60% male and a mean age of 49 years (median = 46 years, range 31–91). The majority of respondents were Caucasian (57.7%) and from New South Wales (29.4%). Sixty‐one per cent were subspecialists with breast, SBRT and urological cancers, the most popular areas of interest, and 56% held leadership positions. The majority worked in the public sector (55.7%), but 31.7% worked solely in the private sector with an average working week of 43.4 hours (h) (median = 44, range 2–110). Radiation oncologists spent an average of 3.6 h on MDTS (median = 4 h), 2.2h (median = 2 h) on simulation and 8 h (median = 5 h) on contouring per week. They averaged 245 new patients (median = 250, range 30–695) and 25 inpatients (median = 20) per year. Hypofractionation was used for radical treatment of breast (75%) and prostate cancer (49%). Radiation oncologists were mainly remunerated with a fixed income (53%) with 40% having some incentive‐based income. There were 140 trainees with an equal male and female distribution. The large majority (88%) were satisfied with their career and network (83%). Most trainees worked between 36 and 55h per week with 15% having no protected time. Most trainees spent less than 5 hours on planning each week and job availability remained a major concern (90%). Conclusions The radiation oncologist numbers have increased significantly, but unemployment remains low. Many parameters remain similar to the 2014 census, but new information has been obtained on special interest areas, leadership positions, gynae‐oncology, inpatients, hypofractionation use, remuneration and contouring. Trainee numbers remain stable with an increased percentage satisfied with their career with much less concern about oversupply. Protected time remains an issue with contouring time and teaching emerging as a potential issue.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 69%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Workforce issues that have been identified to increase ROs' stress include: increasing patient numbers, waiting lists and demands on time, limited opportunities for continuing professional development, perceptions that workforce is undervalued, and interpersonal/teaching demands (Leung, Rioseco, & Munro, 2014;Leung & Vukolova, 2011). Workforce issues that have been identified to increase ROs' stress include: increasing patient numbers, waiting lists and demands on time, limited opportunities for continuing professional development, perceptions that workforce is undervalued, and interpersonal/teaching demands (Leung, Rioseco, & Munro, 2014;Leung & Vukolova, 2011).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Sustainability of the Australian radiation oncology workforce: A survey of radiation therapists and radiation oncology medical physicists

et al. 2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study aimed to determine and compare Radiation Therapists' (RTs') and Radiation Oncology Medical Physicists' (ROMPs') perspectives about their profession and workplace, satisfaction with career progression opportunities, and leaving the current workplace. RTs and ROMPs who were currently or had previously worked in Australia were invited to complete an online survey. Univariate and multivariate methods were used for analysis. Participants were 342 RTs and 112 ROMPs with estimated response rates of 14% and 26% respectively. Both professions rated workload poorly and identified the need for improvement in: communication between professions' members, support for junior staff/new graduates, staff morale, on-site training and multidisciplinary communication. RTs, more than ROMPs, perceived their profession was recognised and respected, but RTs were less likely to be satisfied with career progression/advancement, job promotion prospects and opportunities to specialise. At least 20% of RTs and ROMPs were thinking about leaving their workplace and 13% of RTs and 8% of ROMPs were thinking about leaving their profession. Different factors contributed to workforce satisfaction and retention within each profession. Staff satisfaction and career progression are critical to retain RTs and ROMPs. Further research is required to explore strategies to address workplace dissatisfaction, recruitment and retention.

show abstract

“…The Faculty of Radiation Oncology (FRO) undertook the fifth workforce survey of radiation oncologists and trainees across Australia and New Zealand in 2014. The previous surveys were undertaken in 1996, 2000, 2006 and 2010 . The purpose of the 2010 survey was to create a faculty workforce database that could be updated regularly to analyse workforce trends and to create workforce models to predict future staffing and training requirements .…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionThis paper reports the key findings of the Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census and compares the results with earlier surveys.MethodsThe census was conducted in mid‐2014 with distribution to all radiation oncologists, educational affiliates and trainees listed on the college database. There were six email reminders and responses were anonymous. The overall response rate was 76.1%.ResultsThe age range of fellows was 32–96 (mean = 49 years, median = 47 years). The majority of the radiation oncologists were male (n = 263, 63%). The minority of radiation oncologists were of Asian descent (n = 43, 13.4%). Radiation oncologists graduated from medical school on average 23 years ago (median = 22 years). A minority of fellows (n = 66, 20%) held another postgraduate qualification. Most radiation oncologists worked, on average, at two practices (median = 2, range 1–7). Practising radiation oncologists worked predominantly in the public sector (n = 131, 49%), but many worked in both the public and private sectors (n = 94, 37%), and a minority worked in the private sector only (n = 38, 14%). The largest proportion of the workforce was from New South Wales accounting for 29% of radiation oncologists. Radiation oncologists worked an average of 43 h/week (median = 43 h, range 6–80). Radiation oncologists who worked in the private sector worked less hours than their public sector or public/private sector colleagues. (38.3 vs. 42.9 vs. 44.3 h, P = 0.042). Victorians worked the fewest average hours per week at 38 h and West Australians the most at 46 h/week. Radiation oncologists averaged 48 min for each new case, 17 min per follow up and 11 min for a treatment review. Radiation oncologists averaged 246 new patients per year (median = 250, range = 20–600) with men (average = 268), Western Australians (average = 354) and those in private practice seeing more (average = 275). Most radiation oncologists considered themselves as specialists (n = 151, 60%), but nearly all those from South Australia were generalists (n = 15, 94%) as were three‐quarters of those from private practice. A minority of radiation oncologist respondents (10%) intended to retire within 5 years with a further 16% within 10 years.There was a stabilisation of trainee numbers in Australia and New Zealand with no increase compared with 2010 (142 in 2014 vs. 143 in 2010). The most common age bracket for trainees remained 31–35 years. One‐third of trainees were of Asian descent and nearly half held other degrees. The majority of trainees were satisfied with their career, but 30% were not entirely satisfied. Nearly half of trainee respondents would have reconsidered their choice of specialty had they known about the possible oversupply in the workforce with 12.4% undecided about continuing their career in radiation oncology. There were still 16% of trainees with no protected time during the working week, and a further 21% with only 1 h. Only one trainee respondent preferred to work in private practice, and job availability remained a c...

show abstract

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2010 workforce survey

Cited by 22 publications

References 2 publications

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

Sustainability of the Australian radiation oncology workforce: A survey of radiation therapists and radiation oncology medical physicists

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2014 workforce census

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About