Pilot Study Demonstrating the Value of Interdisciplinary Education on the Integration of Radiation Therapy in Lung Cancer Management.

This study aimed to understand baseline knowledge of basic principles of radiation therapy for lung cancer among medical oncology, thoracic surgery, and pulmonology trainees and practicing physicians and also assess whether a didactic lecture will improve objective knowledge and perceived comfort level in making appropriate referrals to radiation oncology (RO). Radiation oncologists at 8 academic institutions offered a presentation covering indications, logistics, efficacy, and toxicity of thoracic radiation. Participants completed a survey to assess their prior exposures to RO and perceived value of the lecture, and objective knowledge gained based on pre/post-lecture questions. Among 121 attendees, 76 completed the pre-test, and 25 the post-test (response rates 62.8% and 20.7%, respectively). Fifty-seven (75.0%) had never previously experienced a RO didactic about lung cancer, 62 (81.6%) had never seen a linear accelerator, and 65 (85.5%) had never rotated in a RO department. The mean pre-test score was 53.5% (SD 17.6%), with a trend (p = 0.066) towards thoracic surgeons (61.5%) performing better than medical oncologists (55.5%) or pulmonologists (48.3%). Level of training (p = 0.130), and prior RO exposures (p = 0.240), did not significantly impact pre-test scores. The mean post-test score of 75.1% (SD 3.6%) was significantly higher than mean pre-test score (p < 0.001). After the lecture, 25 participants (100%) felt more knowledgeable about RO, and 24 (96%) felt more comfortable making appropriate referrals to RO. A didactic lecture about RO for trainees and physicians who treat lung cancer at 8 academic institutions was feasible, filled a gap in exposure, and improved knowledge.

Pilot Study Evaluating Cross-Disciplinary Educational Material to Improve Patients' Knowledge of Palliative Radiation Therapy.

Palliative radiation therapy (PRT) is underutilized, partially due to misconceptions about its risks, benefits, and indications. The objective of this pilot study was to determine if patients with metastatic cancer would gain knowledge from educational material describing PRT and perceive it as useful in their care. A one-page handout conveying information about the purpose, logistics, benefits, risks, and common indications for PRT was offered to patients undergoing treatment for incurable, metastatic solid tumors in one palliative care clinic and four medical oncology clinics. Participants read the handout, then completed a questionnaire assessing its perceived value. Seventy patients participated between June and December 2021. Sixty-five patients (93%) felt they learned from the handout (40% learned "lots"), and 69 (99%) felt the information was useful (53% "very useful"). Twenty-one patients (30%) were previously unaware that PRT can relieve symptoms, 55 (79%) were unaware that PRT can be delivered in five treatments or less, and 43 (61%) were unaware that PRT usually has few side effects. Sixteen patients (23%) felt they currently had symptoms not being treated well enough, and 34 (49%) felt they had symptoms that radiation might help with. Afterwards, most patients felt more comfortable bringing symptoms to a medical oncologist's (n = 57, 78%) or radiation oncologist's (n = 51, 70%) attention. Patient-directed educational material about PRT, provided outside of a radiation oncology department, was perceived by patients as improving their knowledge and adding value in their care, independent of prior exposure to a radiation oncologist.