ABSTRACT
Most radiotherapy treatments are nowadays delivered with linear accelerators producing photons. This robust radiation technique improved outstandingly during the last three decades, allowing treatments for most tumoural indications with an exquisite accuracy, a formidable effectiveness, a low toxicity, and a very low cost for the society. Therefore, the reasons for using and developing the more expensive hadron therapy and more particularly proton therapy may seem futile. In the current article targeting the general practitioners readership, we look at the principles of this innovative technique, its inherent advantages and limitations, the current and future indications, the challenges and perspectives for the future. We conclude with an overview of the Belgian landscape in terms of installation, operation, access and reimbursement procedures.
L'essentiel des traitements de radiothérapie sont délivrés à l'aide d'accélérateurs linéaires produisant des photons. La technique est robuste et a connu une évolution fulgurante ces trois dernières décennies, apportant une efficacité redoutable et une extrême précision dans de nombreuses indications tumorales, avec les avantages d'un risque de toxicité réduit et d'un coût sociétal extrêmement faible. Dès lors, quel intérêt y aurait-il à utiliser et développer des traitements de radiothérapie par hadrons, et plus particulièrement par protons, sachant que les coûts d'installation et de production sont, au bas mot, décuplés par rapport aux photons ? Dans cet article destiné en première intention aux praticiens de santé généralistes, nous abordons les principes de fonctionnement, les avantages et limitations inhérents à la technique, les indications actuelles et celles qui se profilent, les défis et perspectives à venir. Nous terminons, enfin, par un tour d'horizon du paysage belge en termes d'installation, de fonctionnement, d'accès et de modalités de remboursement.
Subject(s)
Neoplasms , Proton Therapy , Humans , Belgium , Proton Therapy/methods , Neoplasms/radiotherapyABSTRACT
Objective: Electronic Patient-Reported Outcome Measures (ePROMs) could be used to monitor patients' symptoms after treatment. However, ePROM implementation in clinical practice has been challenging, especially in (palliative) radiation oncology. The aim of this study was to explore the opinions of healthcare providers (HCP) active in radiation oncology in Belgium on the use of ePROMs for symptom follow-up after palliative radiotherapy. Methods: An anonymous online survey was conducted with different HCP in radiation oncology in Belgium. Participants were recruited through several professional organizations with approximately 390 members actively working in the field of radiation oncology. The survey used was a self-developed questionnaire, based on existing literature on implementation of (e)PROMs in cancer care, our previous research on this topic as well as our personal experience in the field of oncology and palliative care. Results: Of the 128 respondents, 26% had experience with ePROMs in clinical practice. Eighty-four percent considered ePROMs beneficial for patients' health and symptom knowledge, symptom self-management and active participation in care. ePROMs could help HCP to focus on detection of relevant symptoms and improve their management. Almost 75% were willing to implement and use ePROMs. Assigning ePROM introduction and follow-up to a dedicated person, such as a nurse navigator, was suggested to promote ePROM implementation and use in clinical practice. Conclusion: Despite limited experience with ePROMs in clinical care for palliative radiotherapy patients, the majority of respondents is willing to implement and use ePROMs for this particular patient population. Innovation: This is one of the first studies specifically focusing on experiences and opinions of HCP in radiation oncology on the use of ePROMs for symptom follow-up in palliative radiotherapy. HCP should be actively involved in implementation of ePROMs after palliative radiotherapy, to translate their vision of their ideals in practice.