Leading past COVID-19: An analysis of remote work now and beyond.

In response to the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, many cancer centers and clinics deployed remote work options for their employees. Due to the rapid response needed during this crisis, little to no feedback was obtained from dosimetrists. This study aimed to assess the productivity level and job satisfaction of medical dosimetrists in response to changes in working conditions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. With the assistance from the medical dosimetrists certification board (MDCB), critical data was gathered via an original instrument conducted and distributed by The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center-School of Health Professions to all current practicing certified medical dosimetrists registered with the MDCB. Data were collected using Qualtrics and analyzed with IBM's SPSS. Most (326, 77.7%) participants indicated they transitioned to a version of remote work due to COVID-19. Almost half of the participants (208, 49.5%) reported increased job satisfaction due to the option to work remotely. The participants reported being extremely satisfied with the individual (247, 58.8%) and department (201, 47.9%) productivity levels even after implementing remote work options. Most participants (225, 53.6%), independent of age and years of experience, would prefer to stay in a hybrid role even after COVID-19 abates. These findings suggest that most dosimetrists prefer to perform their job remotely or asynchronously. A one size fits all job model design may make it difficult for organizations to attract, retain, and grow top dosimetrists. Industry leaders and employers may benefit by embracing this change as dosimetrists may value work-set-up flexibility over other employer-based benefits. Further research is needed to assess the unintended consequences of remote work environments in this profession.

Medical dosimetry virtual clinical education: Mentors' perspectives.

The COVID-19 pandemic affected the United States in early 2020, and many universities began offering their curriculum remotely. The majority of medical dosimetry programs started to offer both didactic and clinical education in a virtual setting. With COVID-19 social distancing and patient protective measures, many clinical medical dosimetrists also began to work in a remote or hybrid setting. Medical dosimetry students interact and learn from their clinical mentors in this remote clinical environment. The purpose of this study was to investigate the perspective of medical dosimetry mentors concerning the effectiveness of virtual clinical education for medical dosimetry students as a result of COVID-19. The Medical Dosimetry Mentor Perspective on Virtual Clinical Education (MedDos_VCE) survey measured medical dosimetry mentors' perceptions of the students' virtual clinical experience during the COVID-19 pandemic. The subject of the study was medical dosimetry mentors who participated in a remote clinic due to the COVID-19 pandemic since March 2020. The MedDos_VCE questionnaire measured (1) the mentors' assessment of instructional quality in remote clinical education; (2) opportunities for and quality of interaction between students and medical dosimetry mentors; and (3) suggestions for success from medical dosimetry mentors for students and other mentors who are participating in virtual clinical education. The majority of the clinical mentors were satisfied with the quality of virtual clinical education and students' learning outcomes. They felt that students experienced a good mix of patients, problems, and clinical experience and engaged in the day-to-day activities of a medical dosimetrist. Challenges exist and mentors offered practical suggestions for success for students and mentors in the virtual clinical environment.

The Impact of COVID-19 on Medical Dosimetry Education: Students' Perception on the Effectiveness of Program's Immediate Response.

In early 2020, many medical dosimetry programs began to offer lectures and clinical rotations remotely in response to COVID-19. Faculty instituted an IRB-approved study to investigate the effectiveness of medical dosimetry educational programs' immediate response to COVID-19 and modifications to teaching practices during the pandemic. The Program Response to COVID-19 Effectiveness Questionnaire (PRCEQ) survey was developed to measure students' perceptions of their learning experience during COVID-19. The subject of the study was the medical dosimetry current and former student population who received modified education delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic. This study suggests that generally students are satisfied with the quality of their virtual didactic and clinical education as well as communication between faculty and students and students to students. Programs should develop strategies to engage students during the virtual classes to motivate them to learn; utilize a variety of formats for the evaluation of students' learning, incorporate activities to help students make connections with real-world clinical situations, and schedule clinical visits for students to learn tasks that require their physical presence in clinic.

Optimization of autogenerated chest-wall radiation treatment plans developed for postmastectomy breast cancer patients in underserved clinics.

Over the past decade, several strides have been made to improve the management of breast cancer in developing countries; however, there are still obstacles present. In the area of radiation therapy, these hurdles include limited access to radiotherapy treatment and scarcity of oncology specialists. In an effort to reduce inequities in cancer care while improving patient outcomes, our research is focused on developing automated postmastectomy radiation therapy (PMRT) plans for breast cancer patients in these underserved communities that can be further improved upon through treatment planning system (TPS) specific optimization guidelines. The automated planning tool utilized algorithms integrated with Varian's Eclipse TPS. The tool created PMRT plans that used monoisocentric tangents and supraclavicular (SCV) fields with a mix of high and low energy photon beams along with field-in-field (FIF) segments. The completed autogenerated PMRT plans were imported into Phillip's Pinnacle 9.10 and Varian's Eclipse 13.6 TPSs to be further improved through manual optimization; the time required to complete this step was measured and assessed. A senior dosimetrist, physicist, and physician evaluated the optimized plans for clinical acceptability. Guidelines were developed for the planning systems that can be implemented by personnel with either limited experience in radiation treatment planning or those with limited time to produce treatment plans. The autogenerated plans in conjunction with our guidelines have shown to significantly reduce the time required to produce a clinically acceptable PMRT plan from approximately 120 ± 60 minutes to just 13 ± 11 (Pinnacle) and 12 ± 7 (Eclipse) minutes, reducing the total uninterrupted treatment planning time by an average of 108 ± 51 minutes. The results from this research indicate that the autogenerated PMRT plans along with the optimization guidelines are a viable option to provide quality and clinically acceptable PMRT plans that are more efficient and consistent for postmastectomy breast cancer patients in severely underserved communities.

A retrospective analysis to determine if the timing of H&D curve production has a clinically significant effect on the percent difference in agreement of isodose delivery for film-based IMRT QA.

The current practice of film-based intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT) quality assurance (QA) involves exposing the QA phantom and subsequently exposing a series of small fields to produce an H&D curve. Both of these procedures currently are completed on the same day. To avoid the need to produce several H&D curves, our current practice is to accumulate at least 10 IMRT cases to perform the QA deliveries concurrently, thereby requiring that we only expose a single film to provide an H&D curve to be utilized for all 10 cases. Our current standard requires that the IMRT QA be completed prior to the first treatment delivery. This standard precludes the facilitation of the possible accumulation of IMRT cases, thereby mandating that we expose many more films for H&D curves. This project will investigate the possibility of applying H&D curves exposed on different days than the IMRT QA. We will determine the percent difference between IMRT QA isodose agreement with planned isodose delivery, given that the H&D curve was performed concurrently VS. the IMRT QA isodose agreement with planned isodose delivery with several different H&D curves taken on random dates. This analysis will be performed using the RIT software. The goal of the project is to determine if the timing of H&D curve production has a clinically significant effect on the percent difference in agreement of isodose delivery for IMRT QA. We will not be recommending the parameters that will define clinical significance but rather report the effect for individual discernment.