Radiation Therapy Deficiencies Identified During On-Site Dosimetry Visits by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Houston Quality Assurance Center.
other · Level V
Where this comes from
- Record sourced from PubMed, PMID 29029890.
- Also identified by DOI 10.1016/j.ijrobp.2017.08.013 and PMC identifier 5699963.
- 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
To review the dosimetric, mechanical, and programmatic deficiencies most frequently observed during on-site visits of radiation therapy facilities by the Imaging and Radiation Oncology Core Quality Assurance Center in Houston (IROC Houston). The findings of IROC Houston between 2000 and 2014, including 409 institutions and 1020 linear accelerators (linacs), were compiled. On-site evaluations by IROC Houston include verification of absolute calibration (tolerance of ±3%), relative dosimetric review (tolerances of ±2% between treatment planning system [TPS] calculation and measurement), mechanical evaluation (including multileaf collimator and kilovoltage-megavoltage isocenter evaluation against Task Group [TG]-142 tolerances), and general programmatic review (including institutional quality assurance program vs TG-40 and TG-142). An average of 3.1 deficiencies was identified at each institution visited, a number that has decreased slightly with time. The most common errors are tabulated and include TG-40/TG-142 compliance (82% of institutions were deficient), small field size output factors (59% of institutions had errors ≥3%), and wedge factors (33% of institutions had errors ≥3%). Dosimetric errors of ≥10%, including in beam calibration, were seen at many institutions. There is substantial room for improvement of both dosimetric and programmatic issues in radiation therapy, which should be a high priority for the medical physics community. Particularly relevant was suboptimal beam modeling in the TPS and a corresponding failure to detect these errors by not including TPS data in the linac quality assurance process.
Medical subject headings
- Cancer Care Facilities
- Quality Assurance, Health Care
- Radiation Oncology
- Radiotherapy