ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Growing complexity and demand for cancer care entail increased challenges for Medical Oncology (MO). The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology (SEOM) has promoted studies to provide updated data to estimate the need for medical oncologists in 2040 and to analyse current professional standing of young medical oncologists. METHODS: Two national, online surveys were conducted. The first (2021) targeted 146 Heads of MO Departments, and the second (2022), 775 young medical oncologists who had completed their MO residency between 2014 and 2021. Participants were contacted individually, and data were processed anonymously. RESULTS: Participation rates reached 78.8% and 48.8%, respectively. The updated data suggest that 87-110 new medical oncologist full-time equivalents (FTEs) should be recruited each year to achieve an optimal ratio of 110-130 new cases per medical oncologist FTE by 2040. The professional standing analysis reveals that 9.1% of medical oncologists trained in Spain do not work in clinical care in the country, with tremendous employment instability (only 15.2% have a permanent contract). A high percentage of young medical oncologists have contemplated career paths other than clinical care (64.5%) or working in other countries (51.7%). CONCLUSIONS: Optimal ratios of medical oncologists must be achieved to tackle the evolution of MO workloads and challenges in comprehensive cancer care. However, the incorporation and permanence of medical oncologists in the national healthcare system in Spain could be compromised by their current sub-optimal professional standing.
Subject(s)
Oncologists , Workload , Humans , Spain , Censuses , Medical Oncology , Workforce , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: There is a lack of knowledge about the career paths and employment situation of young medical oncologists. The aim of our study was to evaluate the current professional standing of these professionals in Spain. METHODS: The Spanish Society of Medical Oncology + MIR section conducted a national online survey in May 2021 of young medical oncology consultants (< 6 years of expertise) and final year medical oncology residents. RESULTS: A total of 162 responses were eligible for analysis and included participants from 16 autonomous communities; 64% were women, 80% were consultants, and 20% were residents. More than half of the participants performed routine healthcare activity and only 7% research activity. Almost three quarters (73%) were subspecialized in a main area of interest and almost half of these chose this area because it was the only option available after residency. Half of the respondents (51%) considered working abroad and 81% believed the professional standing in Spain was worse than in other countries. After finishing their residency, only 22 were offered a job at their training hospital. Just 16% of participants had a permanent employment contract and 87% were concerned (score of ≥ 5 on a scale of 1-10) about their job stability. In addition, one quarter of the participants in our study showed an interest in increasing their research activity. CONCLUSIONS: The choice of subspecialty in medical oncology may depend on job opportunities after residency rather than personal interest. The abundance of temporary contracts may have influenced the job stability concerns observed. Future mentoring strategies should engage in building a long-term career path for young medical oncologists.
Subject(s)
Medical Oncology , Oncologists , Humans , Female , Male , Spain , Surveys and Questionnaires , EmploymentABSTRACT
Today, patient management generally requires a multidisciplinary approach. However, due to the growing knowledge base and increasing complexity of Medicine, clinical practice has become even more specialised. Radiation oncology is not immune to this trend towards subspecialisation, which is particularly evident in ablative radiotherapy techniques that require high dose fractions, such as stereotactic radiosurgery (SRS), and stereotactic body radiotherapy (SBRT). The aim of the present report is to establish the position of the Spanish Society of Radiation Oncology (SEOR), in collaboration with the Spanish Society of Medical Physics (SEFM), with regard to the roles and responsibilities of healthcare professionals involved in performing SRS and SBRT. The need for this white paper is motivated due to the recent changes in Spanish Legislation (Royal Decree [RD] 601/2019, October 18, 2019) governing the use and optimization of radiotherapy and radiological protection for medical exposure to ionizing radiation (article 11, points 4 and 5) [1 ], which states: "In radiotherapy treatment units, the specialist in Radiation Oncology will be responsible for determining the correct treatment indication, selecting target volumes, determining the clinical radiation parameters for each volume, directing and supervising treatment, preparing the final clinical report, reporting treatment outcomes, and monitoring the patient's clinical course." Consequently, the SEOR and SEFM have jointly prepared the present document to establish the roles and responsibilities for the specialists-radiation oncologists (RO), medical physicists (MP), and related staff -involved in treatments with ionizing radiation. We believe that it is important to clearly establish the responsibilities of each professional group and to clearly establish the professional competencies at each stage of the radiotherapy process.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms/radiotherapy , Radiosurgery/methods , Radiosurgery/standards , HumansABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Twitter may reflect attitudes underrepresented in traditional surveys. This study aimed to understand professionals' and patients' thoughts regarding brachytherapy on Twitter. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Twitter was queried with "brachytherapy" to identify all tweets about patients' experiences from January 2012 to May 2017. A random sample of tweets by health care professionals containing "brachytherapy" was obtained using the first weekly tweet in the same interval. Consensus coding was used to categorize tweets as "patient" or "professional" based on content about receiving brachytherapy or self-identification as a health care professional. Tweets were analyzed for positive, neutral, or negative sentiment and recurrent themes using manual, iterative coding. Patient tweets were analyzed for whether they were shared before or after treatment and whether the patient, friends, or family had posted them. Professional tweets were analyzed to identify temporal theme changes. RESULTS: One hundred sixty-two patient tweets and 260 professional tweets were obtained from January 2012 to May 2017. On average, 2.5 patient tweets were shared monthly compared to 69 for providers. Among tweets by patients and professionals, 57% vs. 12% expressed positive sentiment, 21% vs. 3% negative sentiment, and 22% vs. 85% neutral sentiment, respectively. The most common patient and professional codes were "general sharing of experience/casual conversation" (32%) and "science" (21%), respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients tweeted less about brachytherapy than professionals and generally expressed favorable and negative sentiments regarding their radiation treatment experiences. Professionals tended to express neutral sentiment and focus on research. Opportunities exist for greater radiation oncologist engagement in this medium.
Subject(s)
Brachytherapy/statistics & numerical data , Social Media/statistics & numerical data , Attitude of Health Personnel , Health Personnel/statistics & numerical data , HumansABSTRACT
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to analyze differences in physician and patient satisfaction in shared decision-making (SDM); patients' emotional distress, and coping in subjects with resected, non-metastatic cancer. METHODS: 602 patients from 14 hospitals in Spain were surveyed. Information was collected regarding physician and patient satisfaction with SDM, participants' emotional distress and coping, as well as patient sociodemographic and clinical characteristics by means of specific, validated questionnaires. RESULTS: Overall, 11% of physicians and 19% of patients were dissatisfied with SDM; 22% of patients presented hopelessness or anxious preoccupation as coping strategies, and 56% presented emotional distress. By gender, female patients showed a higher prevalence of dissatisfaction with SDM (23 vs 14%), anxious preoccupation (26 vs 17%), and emotional distress (63 vs 44%) than males. Hopelessness was more prevalent in individuals with stage III disease than those with stages I-II (28 vs 18%). CONCLUSION: Physicians must be mindful of the importance of emotional support and individual characteristics when communicating treatment options, benefits, and adverse effects of each alternative to oncological patients.
Subject(s)
Chemotherapy, Adjuvant , Decision Making , Job Satisfaction , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/epidemiology , Patient Satisfaction/statistics & numerical data , Physicians/psychology , Adult , Aged , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/psychology , Chemotherapy, Adjuvant/statistics & numerical data , Female , Humans , Male , Medical Oncology/methods , Medical Oncology/standards , Medical Oncology/statistics & numerical data , Middle Aged , Neoplasms/complications , Neoplasms/psychology , Physicians/statistics & numerical data , Socioeconomic Factors , Spain/epidemiology , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to analyze the psychometric properties of the Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire-Physician version (SDM-Q-Doc) in a sample of medical oncologists who provide adjuvant treatment to patients with non-metastatic resected cancer and the correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided. METHODS: Prospective, observational and multicenter study in which 32 medical oncologists and 520 patients were recruited. The psychometric properties, dimensionality, and factor structure of the SDM-Q-Doc were assessed. RESULTS: Exploratory factor analyses suggested that the most likely solution was two-dimensional, with two correlated factors: one factor regarding information and another one about treatment. Confirmatory factor analysis based on cross-validation showed that the fitted two-dimensional solution provided the best fit to the data. Reliability analyses revealed good accuracy for the derived scores, both total and sub-scale, with estimates ranging from 0.81 to 0.89. The results revealed significant correlations between the total SDM-Q-Doc score and physician satisfaction with the information provided (p < 0.01); between information sub-scale scores (factor 1) and satisfaction (p < 0.01), and between treatment sub-scale scores (factor 2) and satisfaction (p < 0.01). Medical oncologists of older age and those with more years of experience showed more interest in the patient preferences (p = 0.026 and p = 0.020, respectively). Patient age negatively correlated with SDM information (p < 0.01) and physicians appear to provide more information to young patients. CONCLUSION: SDM-Q-Doc showed good psychometric properties and could be a helpful tool that examines physician's perspective of SDM and as an indicator of quality and satisfaction in patients with cancer.