ArticleJournal of radiation research2024
Current status of the working environment of brachytherapy in Japan: a nationwide survey-based analysis focusing on radiotherapy technologists and medical physicists.
Article in Journal of radiation research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Brachytherapy (BT), especially in high dose rate (HDR), has become increasingly complex owing to the use of image-guided techniques and the introduction of advanced applicators. Consequently, radiotherapy technologists and medical physicists (RTMPs) require substantial training to enhance their knowledge and technical skills in image-guided brachytherapy. However, the current status of the RTMP workload, individual abilities and quality control (QC) of BT units in Japan remains unclear. To address this issue, we conducted a questionnaire survey from June to August 2022 in all 837 radiation treatment facilities in Japan involving RTMPs. This survey focused on gynecological cancers treated with HDR-BT (GY-HDR) and permanent prostate implantation using low-dose-rate BT (PR-LDR). The responses revealed that the average working time in the overall process for HDR varied: 120 min for intracavitary BT and 180 min for intracavitary BT combined with interstitial BT. The QC implementation rate, in accordance with domestic guidelines, was 65% for GY-HDR and 44% for PR-LDR, which was lower than the 69% observed for external beam radiation therapy (EBRT). Additionally, the implementation rate during regular working hours was low. Even among RTMP working in facilities performing BT, the proportion of those able to perform QC for BT units was ~30% for GY-HDR and <20% for PR-LDR, significantly lower than the 80% achieved for EBRT. This study highlights the vulnerabilities of Japan's BT unit QC implementation structure. Addressing these issues requires appropriate training of the RTMP staff to safely perform BT tasks and improvements in practical education and training systems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.