A pan-Canadian survey of peer review practices in radiation oncology.
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 27025163.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.prro.2016.01.014.
- No licence information is recorded for this record.
- Because redistribution is not established, this page shows the abstract only. Follow the links below for the full text.
Abstract
Peer review (PR) of treatment plans has been recognized internationally as a key component of quality care in radiation oncology programs (ROPs). We conducted a survey of Canadian ROPs to describe current PR practices and identify barriers/facilitators to PR optimization. A 42-item e-survey was sent to all Canadian ROPs (n = 44). Survey development was guided by expert consensus, literature review, and existing guidelines. One multidisciplinary response per ROP was requested. Response rate was 100.0% (44/44). All ROPs (100.0%) reported conducting some PR and rated its importance as 7/10 or higher (10 = extremely important). One-half of ROPs (52.3%) peer-reviewed >80% of curative treatment plans. ROPs reported performing PR "always/almost always" pretreatment (38.6%) or before 25% of radiation therapy delivery (52.3%). The majority of ROPs reported recommending major plan changes in <5% of plans (88.6%) and documenting findings in the medical record (58.1%). Barriers to PR were radiation oncologist availability (34.1%) and time constraints (27.3%). Facilitators included development of PR standards (97.7%) and education/support (90.9%). The ROPs perceive PR as highly important, but substantial variation in the extent, timing, and documentation of PR exists. The understanding of current PR activities, barriers, and facilitators will inform the development of initiatives to optimize PR in radiation oncology.
Medical subject headings
- Radiation Oncology