Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37816672›Full record

ArticleJournal of radiation research2023

A national survey on the medical physics workload of external beam radiotherapy in Japan†.

Naoki Tohyama, Hiroyuki Okamoto, Kohei Shimomura, Masahiko Kurooka, Ryu Kawamorita, Seiichi Ota, Toru Kojima, Naoki Hayashi, Masahiko Okumura, Masaru Nakamura and 3 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of radiation research, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 13 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
13citing papers in PubMed
5.4field-weighted citation impact, top 3% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

13 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

13 authors at 11 institutions in 1 country.

Naoki TohyamaDivision of Medical Physics, Tokyo Bay Makuhari Clinic for Advanced Imaging, Cancer Screening, and High-Precision Radiotherapy, 1-17 Toyosuna, Mihama-ku, Chiba-shi, Chiba 261-0024, Japan.
Hiroyuki OkamotoDivision of Radiation Safety and Quality Assurance, National Cancer Center Hospital, 5-1-1 Tsukiji, Chuo-ku, Tokyo 104-0045, Japan.
Kohei ShimomuraDepartment of Radiological Technology, Faculty of Medical Science, Kyoto College of Medical Science, 1-3 Sonobechooyamahigashimachi, Nantan-shi, Kyoto 622-0041, Japan.
Masahiko KurookaDepartment of Radiation Therapy, Tokyo Medical University Hospital, 6-7-1 Nishishinjuku, Shinjuku-ku, Tokyo 160-0023 Japan.
Ryu KawamoritaDepartment of Medical Technology, Tane General Hospital, 1-12-21 Kujo-minami, Nishi-ku, Osaka-shi, Osaka 550-0025, Japan.
Seiichi OtaDivision of Radiological Technology, Department of Medical Technology, University Hospital, Kyoto Prefectural University of Medicine, 465 Kajii-cho, Kamigyo-ku, Kyoto 602-8566, Japan.
Toru KojimaDepartment of Radiation Oncology, Saitama Cancer Center, 780 Komuro, Ina-machi, Saitama 362-0806, Japan.
Naoki HayashiDivision of Medical Physics, School of Medical Sciences, Fujita Health University, 1-98 Dengakugakubo, Kutsukakecho, Toyoake, Aichi 470-1192, Japan.
Masahiko OkumuraDepartment of Radiological Sciences, Faculty of Medical Science Technology, Morinomiya University of Medical Sciences, 1-26-16 Nankoukita, Suminoe-ku, Osaka-shi, Osaka 559-8611, Japan.
Masaru NakamuraDepartment of Medical Technology, Aichi Medical University Medical Center, 17-33 Kawagoe, Nikki-cho, Okazaki-shi, Aichi 444-2148, Japan.
Mitsuhiro NakamuraDepartment of Advanced Medical Physics, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, 53 Kawahara-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto 606-8507, Japan.
Atsushi MyojoyamaDepartment of Radiological Science, Graduate School of Human Health Sciences, Tokyo Metropolitan University, 7-2-10 Higashiogu, Arakawa-ku, Tokyo 116-8551, Japan.
Hiroshi OnishiDepartment of Radiology, University of Yamanashi Faculty of Medicine, 1110 Shimokato, Chuo-shi, Yamanashi 409-3898, Japan.
Aichi Medical University Medical CenterFujita Health University Hospital · JPKyoto College of Medical Science · JPKyoto Prefectural University of Medicine · JPKyoto University · JPMorinomiya University of Medical Sciences · JPSaitama Cancer Center · JPTane General Hospital · JPTokyo Medical University Hospital · JPTokyo Metropolitan University · JPUniversity of Yamanashi Hospital · JP

Funding

Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare for Health Sciences Research 21EA1010
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Several staffing models are used to determine the required medical physics staffing, including radiotherapy technologists, of radiation oncology departments. However, since Japanese facilities tend to be smaller in scale than foreign ones, those models might not apply to Japan. Therefore, in this study, we surveyed workloads in Japan to estimate the optimal medical physics staffing in external beam radiotherapy. A total of 837 facilities were surveyed to collect information regarding radiotherapy techniques and medical physics specialists (RTMPs). The survey covered facility information, staffing, patient volume, equipment volume, workload and quality assurance (QA) status. Full-time equivalent (FTE) factors were estimated from the workload and compared with several models. Responses were received from 579 facilities (69.2%). The median annual patient volume was 369 at designated cancer care hospitals (DCCHs) and 252 across all facilities. In addition, the median FTE of RTMPs was 4.6 at DCCHs and 3.0 at all sites, and the average QA implementation rate for radiotherapy equipment was 69.4%. Furthermore, advanced treatment technologies have increased workloads, particularly in computed tomography simulations and treatment planning tasks. Compared to published models, larger facilities (over 500 annual patients) had a shortage of medical physics staff. In very small facilities (about 140 annual patients), the medical physics staffing requirement was estimated to be 0.5 FTE, implying that employing a full-time medical physicist would be inefficient. However, ensuring the quality of radiotherapy is an important issue, given the limited number of RTMPs. Our study provides insights into optimizing staffing and resource allocation in radiotherapy departments.

Indexed as

NeoplasmsRadiation OncologyHumansJapanPhysicsSurveys and QuestionnairesWorkloadfull-time equivalentmedical physicistradiation oncologyradiotherapy technologiststaffing modelworkload

Identifiers

PMID37816672
PMCPMC10665301
OpenAlexW4387473669

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.