The American Society for Radiation Oncology 2017 Radiation Oncologist Workforce Study

Fung, Claire Y.; Chen, Erli; Vapiwala, Neha; Pohar, Surjeet; Trifiletti, Daniel M.; Truong, Minh Tam; Uschold, George; Schuster, Jéssica; Patel, Akshar N.; Jani, Ashesh B.; Mohindra, Pranshu; Sanders, Tim; Gardner, Liz; Arnone, Anna; Royce, Trevor J.

doi:10.1016/j.ijrobp.2018.10.020

Cited by 93 publications

(83 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Perhaps surprisingly SBRT was ranked second above urological and lung cancers. The widespread adoption of SBRT by ANZ and Singaporean radiation oncologists is in keeping with our United States counterparts who had 85% of their practitioners using it in their most recent study …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

“…Remuneration is a sensitive area to ask questions about, but the census has revealed 44% ( n = 115) of radiation oncologist respondents having some of their income based on incentive. This compares to 77% in the US workforce study, although 37% of the US respondents had a decrease in pay over the last few years, primarily due to a workforce not dependant on pure productivity models and decline in reimbursement …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…There has been a strong desire to attract indigenous doctors into the RANZCR training programme; however, the impact has not yet been seen suggesting that more needs to be done given the disparity in health outcomes between the indigenous and nonindigenous Australians. Under‐represented minority groups have been highlighted in the United States (US) workforce which continues to be low, but at least they have some representation (4–7%) . There is an increasing proportion of Asian representation amongst radiation oncologist respondents up from 13 to 20 per cent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2002, there were 76% in private practice and 17% in academic practice . In 2017, there were 40% in private practice and 40% in academic practice …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Under-represented minority groups have been highlighted in the United States (US) workforce which continues to be low, but at least they have some representation (4-7%). [12][13][14] There is an increasing proportion of Asian representation amongst radiation oncologist respondents up from 13 to 20 per cent. The proportion of female radiation oncologists in the workforce remains steady at around 40 per cent.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

et al. 2019

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: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 54%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…In 2002, there were 76% in private practice and 17% in academic practice . In 2017, there were 40% in private practice and 40% in academic practice …”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

et al. 2019

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Medical workforce in the United States

Bluth

Frush

Oates

et al. 2022

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This section focuses on the professional workforce comprised of the primary medical specialties that utilize ionizing radiation in their practices. Those discussed include the specialties of radiology and radiation oncology, as well as the subspecialties of radiology,namely diagnostic radiology,interventional radiology, nuclear radiology, and nuclear medicine. These professionals provide essential health care services, for example, the interpretation of imaging studies, the provision of interventional procedures, radionuclide therapeutic treatments, and radiation therapy. In addition, they may be called on to function as part of a radiologic emergency response team to care for potentially exposed persons following radiation events, for example, detonation of a nuclear weapon, nuclear power plant accidents, and transportation incidents. For these reasons, maintenance of an adequate workforce in each of these professions is essential to meeting the nation's future needs.Currently,there is a shortage for all physicians in the medical radiology workforce.

show abstract

Underserved communities in the radiation therapy land of plenty – Physicists’ perspective

Praeder,

Solberg,

Yorke

2024

J Applied Clin Med Phys

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Underserved communities in the radiation therapy land of plenty -Physicists' perspectiveA phrase that's often used in the space of global health research is "global health is local health." Yet in the space of local health, few publications and very little of the attention of professional organizations within our sphere, including the American Association of Physicists in Medicine's (AAPM) and the American Society for Radiation Oncology (ASTRO), have prioritized access to care in rural and underserved communities in the United States. While the AAPM has an entire international council focused on a myriad of global issues, there is nothing similar for underserved communities in the United States. ASTRO has the ARRO Global Health Subcommittee, and within the United States prioritizes access to care almost exclusively in the context of Medicare reform and prior authorization. To its credit, the Radiation Oncology Institute (ROI) recently launched a funding mechanism to address geographic barriers and "reduce disparities in radiation care for underserved populations in domestic or global settings." In this editorial, we highlight the scope of the access to healthcare problem here in the United States, with a goal of raising awareness and activism within the clinical medical physics community. Rural areas are one example of communities in the United States challenged with access to healthcare. Deaths from heart disease, cancer and stroke are all higher in rural areas, and the gap is widening, with studies suggesting the mortality gap between rural and urban areas has doubled since 2000. 1 There are far fewer physicians per capita in rural areas than in nonrural areas: one fifth of the US population resides in rural areas while only one tenth of all physicians practice in these areas. 2,3 Oncology specialists, as is the case with most medical specialties, are even more concentrated in urban areas; only 3% of medical oncologists practice in rural areas, and at the same time over 70% of counties in the United States have no access to medical oncologists. 2 The 2017 ASTRO Workforce Study 4 found that 88% of radiation oncologists practiced in urban or suburban areas (of whom 18% planned to retire in the next 5 years), and that only 13% practiced in the rural areas that account for roughly 20% of the US population (of whom 30% planned to retire in the next 5 years).

show abstract

The American Society for Radiation Oncology 2017 Radiation Oncologist Workforce Study

Cited by 93 publications

References 36 publications

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census

Medical workforce in the United States

Underserved communities in the radiation therapy land of plenty – Physicists’ perspective

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About