The role of the radiotherapy treatment review radiographer

Colyer, H.

doi:10.1053/radi.2000.0283

Cited by 32 publications

(62 citation statements)

References 1 publication

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…2,11,18 There is a tendency for RTs' perception of their ability in this role to be higher than the ROs' perception of RT reviewer ability. 11 It is important to note that perception of capability does not necessarily equate to competency.…”

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…13 The reviewer needs to be skilled to competently address all areas encouraging open communication and providing appropriate resources to support the patient. 2 A failure to address the non-medical aspects of patient care and long waiting times endured by patients are negative by-products of the limited time ROs have for treatment reviews. 17 In addition, some ROs have stated that they do not deal with the non-medical concerns of patients not only because of time restraints but also because of the lack of relevance to a "medical" review; with some even considering themselves as not being the appropriate professional to deal with these issues.…”

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 The RTs also see themselves as more accessible and closer to patients, which facilitates communication, particularly concerning issues which may appear trivial to ask an RO. 2 The impact of this on patients is that many are reluctant to seek support from the RO for "non-medical" issues because they perceive these concerns to be inappropriate or of little significance to bring up in a treatment review with an RO who may have very limited time to deal with these concerns. 13,16 Patients then attempt to cope with these concerns by themselves and do not seek further support from other cancer care professionals.…”

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…11 The reviewer needs to possess the ability to determine where their own capabilities are sufficient to care for the patient or when specialist intervention is required. 2 ROs may be hesitant in handing over the treatment review role if they are not confident that RTs can recognise their limitations and refer the patient when necessary. The implementation of safeguards ensures a high standard of patient care and are a solution to the ROs' hesitations about this role development.…”

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The implementation of safeguards ensures a high standard of patient care and are a solution to the ROs' hesitations about this role development. 2,11,18 In one study, a policy was employed where the RO was required to assess the patient at least once during their treatment, to maintain some control over the review process. 2 At the Beatson West of Scotland Cancer Care Centre, the Radiation Therapy Oncology Group scoring tool was used by the specialised nurse or RT reviewers, to assess skin reactions and their appropriate management.…”

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 4 more Smart Citations

Radiation therapist‐led weekly patient treatment reviews

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The purpose of this discussion article is to explore the implementation of radiation therapist‐led treatment reviews as a form of advanced practice for radiation therapists in Australia. The feasibility of such a role, the impact on cancer care services and implementation requirements to enable the position to be implemented effectively in an Australian environment are explored. Current practice involving weekly patient treatment reviews and cases where health professionals other than radiation oncologists have undertaken this role will be evaluated. Recommendations on its implementation in an Australian environment are also given. An extensive literature review was conducted through the databases ScienceDirect, Medline and CINAHL. Searches were carried out using the following keywords; “radi*” and “prescribing”, “radi*” and “patient review” and “radi*” and “role development”. Abstracts of the yielded results were appraised and those that matched criteria for analysis underwent critical review for inclusion in the discussion. Although steps have been taken to implement the advanced practice role of a treatment review radiation therapist in Australia, little has been done to formalise the role. It is evident from the international literature that the radiation therapist‐led reviewer role has resulted in benefits to patients, medical specialists and therapists. This advanced practice role has the potential to increase radiation therapist retention and recruitment. Implementation of this role in the Australian environment would be advantageous; however criteria outlining the scope of practice and remuneration packages need to be established to facilitate the synthesis of this role in a clinical environment.

show abstract

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 98%

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Benefits To the Patientmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Radiation therapist‐led weekly patient treatment reviews

et al. 2009

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

Systematic review — role expansion in radiation therapy: from an international perspective to an Australian context

Acharya

Vatsavayi

et al. 2009

Radiographer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This systematic review aims to explore the current state of role expansion in radiation therapy internationally and gain an informed understanding of the possibilities of such practices in an Australian context. A comprehensive search from 1990 to 2008 was undertaken to extract publications from electronic databases, individual journals and professional bodies. A thorough title and abstract audit was conducted. Fifteen articles were selected for critical analysis after content examination. The results indicated that expanded roles for radiation therapists (RTs) have been implemented internationally, but few are reported in the Australian environment. The two most prominent roles identified were the patient treatment reviewer and the image reviewer. Additionally, roles such as the breast planning RT, research RT and information and support RT have also been described. The data offered a substantial amount of evidence that developed countries are progressing rapidly towards role expansion. Expanded practice has conferred greater accountability; autonomy and responsibility on RTs. Positive outcomes such as improved patient care and increased job satisfaction for RTs have been observed despite barriers such as medical dominance and legal issues. It therefore appears that role expansion in RT is viable in Australia, but further research and evaluation should be conducted before role expansion is applied.

show abstract

An exploration of the feasibility of radiation therapist participation in treatment reviews

Monk

Wrightson

Smith

2013

J of Medical Radiation Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

IntroductionAs radiation oncologists' (ROs') workload has increased over time, treatment review clinics have become recognized as an area of RO practice into which radiation therapist (RT) practice could extend. There has been limited utilization of RTs in this role in Australia and a paucity of data on the acceptability and opinions regarding RTs practising in this role in an Australian context. The purpose of this audit was to investigate the feasibility of RT participation in review clinics at Calvary Mater Newcastle.MethodsFeasibility was determined by two methods: an audit of 200 treatment reviews to determine medical intervention (MI) levels required and a survey of 80 clinical staff to explore attitudes towards RT participation in clinics.ResultsMedical intervention was required in 59% (n = 118) of observed reviews, with the lowest being for breast (33%) and prostate (28%) cancers. MI peaked at 73% between fractions 16–20 and was lowest early and late in the treatment period at 48%. There were 60 responses to the staff survey. All but one respondent agreed that RTs would be willing to participate in treatment review clinics, but all five consultant ROs indicated they would not be willing to delegate reviews to RTs.ConclusionsNeither feasibility measure reached acceptable levels to recommend RT participation in treatment review clinics. Further investigation and RT education are required to help meet the future RO workforce shortfall. As MI rates are lowest for breast and prostate cancer RT participation could be targeted to these clinics.

show abstract

The role of the radiotherapy treatment review radiographer

Cited by 32 publications

References 1 publication

Radiation therapist‐led weekly patient treatment reviews

Radiation therapist‐led weekly patient treatment reviews

Systematic review — role expansion in radiation therapy: from an international perspective to an Australian context

An exploration of the feasibility of radiation therapist participation in treatment reviews

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About