Fostering Radiation Oncology Physician Scientist Trainees Within a Diverse Workforce: The Radiation Oncology Research Scholar Track.

There is a need to foster future generations of radiation oncology physician scientists, but the number of radiation oncologists with sufficient education, training, and funding to make transformative discoveries is relatively small. A large number of MD/PhD graduates have entered he field of radiation oncology over the past 2 decades, but this has not led to a significant cohort of externally funded physician scientists. Because radiation oncologists leading independent research labs have the potential to make transformative discoveries that advance our field and positively affect patients with cancer, we created the Duke Radiation Oncology Research Scholar (RORS) Program. In crafting this program, we sought to eliminate barriers preventing radiation oncology trainees from becoming independent physician scientists. The RORS program integrates the existing American Board of Radiology Holman Pathway with a 2-year post-graduate medical education instructor position with 80% research effort at the same institution. We use a separate match for RORS and traditional residency pathways, which we hope will increase the diversity of our residency program. Since the inception of the RORS program, we have matched 2 trainees into our program. We encourage other radiation oncology residency programs at peer institutions to consider this training pathway as a means to foster the development of independent physician scientists and a diverse workforce in radiation oncology.

Faculty of Radiation Oncology 2018 workforce census: the status of the radiation oncology workforce in New Zealand.

AIM: This paper outlines the results of the Royal Australian and New Zealand College of Radiologists (RANZCR) Faculty of Radiation Oncology (FRO) 2018 workforce census. Here we report the responses of New Zealand radiation oncologists and trainees in order to understand characteristics of the New Zealand radiation oncology workforce. METHOD: The workforce census was conducted online during July-September 2018. Distribution was by Survey Monkey to all radiation oncologists (fellows, life members, educational affiliates, retired) and trainees on the RANZCR membership database, including members from Australia, New Zealand and Singapore. All responses were aggregated for analysis. This paper addresses only responses from New Zealand members. The census was designed to explore issues relevant to the New Zealand workforce, and questions from previous workforce censuses were repeated in order to monitor trends. RESULTS: The response rate for New Zealand radiation oncologists was 73.3% (44/60). The majority (67%) were male. The average age was 50.8 years. Three-fifths (59.5%) reported New Zealand ethnicity. One-third obtained their specialist qualifications outside of Australia and New Zealand. Most worked in the public sector only (63.4%), with only two in exclusive private practice. Most radiation oncologists attained a consultant post immediately on completion of training, but there were 26 who pursued an overseas fellowship. Most worked one full-time equivalent or greater (FTE), with 17.5% working less than 1.0 FTE. Radiation oncologists reported working a median of 50.0 hours per week, with half working over 10 hours above their contracted hours. Most time was spent on clinical duties with minimal time spent on research. Radiation oncologists reported seeing an average of 235 new patients per year (median: 230). Leadership positions were held by 21/43 respondents. Within 15 years, 55% of the current workforce reported an intention to retire, including 30% of those currently practising highly specialised brachytherapy. Females in the workforce were less likely to work fulltime and spent less time in research and management activities. All trainees reported full-time work, although 50% expressed a desire for part-time training. Half of the trainees reported working 6-10 hours on call, and 60% reported two or less hours of protected teaching per week. Despite this, 90% of trainees were satisfied with their career choice. CONCLUSIONS: Radiation oncology is a small specialty in New Zealand, with a significant reliance on overseas-trained specialists. The specialty continues to work significant overtime hours while time spent on research and non-clinical duties remains low. The growth in staffing between the 2014 and 2018 census has been low. Trainee numbers do not appear sufficient to meet the demand for replacing staff, due to retirements and the reduction of hours. Radiation intervention rates are low in New Zealand, but growth would be reliant on an expansion of the workforce beyond simply replacing staff losses. The radiation oncology workforce in New Zealand remains vulnerable, and careful consideration must be given to expansion and retention to ensure a viable workforce for the future.

Radiation Oncology in Oman: Current Status and Future Challenges.

Oman is a high-income Middle Eastern country. Over the past 50 years, the country's health care system has undergone revolutionary changes to meet the health care needs of its population, driven by high oil and gas revenues. It currently has a very efficient universal health care system. There are 2 linear accelerators in the country and 6 radiation oncologists. A new cancer research center is currently under construction. The major challenge that could affect the delivery of radiation therapy in the future is sustenance of the health care achievements in view of a growing population and the reliance on public funding for health care delivery.

National Trends and Dynamic Responses in the Canadian Radiation Oncology Workforce From 1990 to 2018.

PURPOSE: To report radiation oncology (RO) workforce and cancer incidence trends in Canada and explore the relationship between the two. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Canadian radiation oncologist, trainee, and cancer incidence data from 1990 to 2018 were collected from the following publicly accessible administrative and health information databases: Canadian Post-MD Education Registry (1990-2018), Canadian Medical Association Physician Data Centre (1994-2018), Canadian Institute for Health Information/Scott's Medical Database (1990-2017), Canadian Cancer Registry (1990-2017), and Statistics Canada (1990-2017). Descriptive statistics were used to summarize the data. RESULTS: The Canadian RO workforce grew from 240 radiation oncologists in 1990 to 567 in 2018, with the largest growth period from 2005 to 2015 adding 207 radiation oncologists. Regional analyses revealed steady or stepwise growth in all Canadian regions, except in Québec, where the number of radiation oncologists decreased from 86 in 1990 to 57 in 2003 before rising to 139 by 2018. Trainee totals were between 54 and 173 per year with 2 periods of growth (1990-1996 and 2001-2008) and regression (1996-2001 and 2008-2018), signifying trainee supply variability. Female proportions of the workforce and trainees, respectively, rose steadily from 18% to 38% and 28% to 50%, while the workforce proportion with non-Canadian medical degrees decreased from 40% to 26%. Radiation oncologists younger than 40 years increased from 70 to 171, whereas those age 60 years and older decreased from 85 in 1990 to 31 in 2002 and then increased to 108 in 2017. Annual cancer incidence rose steadily from 103,780 to 206,290 cases/year. The annual cancer incidence-to-provider ratio fluctuated (364-475:1) and trended lower with time, and proportional cancer incidence-to-provider ratios varied between 0.7:1 and 1.6:1 in Canada's regions before approaching 1:1. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates the challenges and successes of managing the Canadian radiation oncologist workforce. These data will inform policy makers and other stakeholders to ensure that the profession meets the current and future needs of Canadian cancer patients.

Taking Stock: The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology 2017 Radiation Oncologist Workforce Study.

PURPOSE: To identify and report radiation oncologist (RO) workforce demographics, clinical workload trends, and equipment inventory in Canada. METHODS AND MATERIALS: The Canadian Association of Radiation Oncology (CARO) distributed an online survey to RO administrative leaders at 47 Canadian cancer centers providing radiation therapy services from June to December 2017. The survey queried RO staff demographics, clinical workload, and equipment inventory from 2014 to 2016. RESULTS: The response rate was 98% and represented 46 of 47 centers for analysis. In 2016, 510 ROs were in practice, with 98 ROs (19.2%) having <1.0 full-time equivalent (FTE) clinical work activities because of administration, research, or part-time employment. Most ROs worked full-time (92.0%), were affiliated with a university (77.5%), and worked in communities with a population >200,000 (84.9%). Approximately half (52.3%) were ≥46 years old. The male-to female ratio was 1.5:1 or higher in all regions of Canada except for Quebec, where there was no gender gap. Part-time employment was more common among female ROs (P < .01). Although FTE staff levels rose steadily between 2014 (456.3) and 2016 (475.8), an increase in patient workload resulted in a rise in the average annual consults per FTE-RO (from 257 to 267). Over a 2-year period, there were 63.5 FTE-recruitments and 44.0 FTE-departures (18.3 FTE-retirements; 25.7 FTE-migration) for a net gain of 19.5 RO-FTEs. An 8.4% increase in FTE staffing to 516 RO-FTEs in 2019 is anticipated, with 22 ROs expected to retire by 2019. There were 251 megavoltage linear accelerators across Canada, with most (39.8%) located in Ontario. Approximately one-fifth (20.7%) of these were older than 10 years and operating beyond the equipment's recommended life span. CONCLUSIONS: The Canadian RO workforce demonstrated incremental growth, but rising annual caseloads suggest that radiation therapy demand outpaced RO supply gains. Government funding is required to replace aging equipment in Canada.

Are there enough radiation oncologists to lead the new Spanish radiotherapy?

AIM: Radiation oncology services in Spain are undergoing a process of technical modernization, but-in a context of increasing demand by an ageing population-it is unclear whether there are enough radiation oncologists to staff the newly equipped units. This study aims to assess the number of specialists working in radiation oncology services in Spain relative to current and future needs. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In the second half of 2017, the Commission on Infrastructures of the Spanish Society for Radiation Oncology (SEOR) sent a questionnaire on radiation oncology staff to the heads of all 122 public (n = 76, 62%) and private (n = 46, 38%) radiation oncology services in Spain. Data collected were the number of professionals, their position, and their year of birth for specialists and residents in each service. In the descriptive analysis, for continuous variables we calculated means, standard deviations and ranges for each Spanish region and work post. For qualitative variables, we constructed frequency tables. All analyses were performed with R statistical software, version 3.5.1. RESULTS: The survey response rate was 100% among service heads across all 122 centers. The total number of radiation oncologists working in these centers is 721, or 15.4 per million population, with considerable variations between regions. Given the national recommendations to have 20 radiation oncologists per million population, there is currently a deficit of 204 specialists. If the 163 upcoming retirements are also taken into account, there will be 367 fewer radiation oncologists than required to meet the 25% increase in indications for radiotherapy projected for 2025. CONCLUSIONS: The classic model for calculating staff needs based on the number of treatments is outdated, and recommendations should be revised to reflect the current reality. A new model should integrate the most complex technological advances and emerging plans in radiotherapy, without neglecting the other activities carried out in radiation oncology services that are not directly linked to patient care.

Employment for radiation oncologists in Australia and New Zealand: Recent graduates survey of experiences and perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: This paper reports the key findings of the first survey of recent Radiation Oncology graduates in Australia, New Zealand (ANZ) and Singapore. It explores their experiences in entering the workforce, challenges and perspectives. METHODS: The survey was conducted in April and May 2016 focusing on graduates from 2013 to 2015. The questions related to relocation, current employment, experiences in finding a job, intentions regarding rural work, job satisfaction and perceptions of the job market. RESULTS: The response rate was 80% (66/83). Most respondents (72.7%) commenced and completed their training in the same location. The large majority of respondents (91%) were employed with 51% as consultants, 20% as fellows and 15% as locums. Sixty-four percent of respondents spent more than twelve weeks looking for a consultant position, but this was expected by 80% of respondents. Seventy-three percent of respondents spent more than four weeks looking for a fellowship position, but this was expected by 90%. Twenty seven percent of respondents lived and worked in a rural area with nearly half of respondents who did not work in a rural area, indicating they would consider so if certain conditions were met. The large majority (75%) were satisfied with their current employment with only seven percent reporting dissatisfaction. Respondents felt that the job market was very competitive because of the large number of trainees and better workforce planning was required to ensure a reasonable balance between workforce supply and demand. Some career guidance and mentorship for readiness for the job market was thought to be beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: This initial survey of recent Radiation Oncology graduates in ANZ and Singapore has revealed the large majority are employed as consultants or fellows, although there is apprehension about a competitive job market. The survey should be repeated on a regular basis to monitor future trends.

Radiotherapy infrastructure and human resources in Switzerland : Present status and projected computations for 2020.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate the present status of radiotherapy infrastructure and human resources in Switzerland and compute projections for 2020. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The European Society of Therapeutic Radiation Oncology "Quantification of Radiation Therapy Infrastructure and Staffing" guidelines (ESTRO-QUARTS) and those of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were applied to estimate the requirements for teleradiotherapy (TRT) units, radiation oncologists (RO), medical physicists (MP) and radiotherapy technologists (RTT). The databases used for computation of the present gap and additional requirements are (a) Global Cancer Incidence, Mortality and Prevalence (GLOBOCAN) for cancer incidence (b) the Directory of Radiotherapy Centres (DIRAC) of the IAEA for existing TRT units (c) human resources from the recent ESTRO "Health Economics in Radiation Oncology" (HERO) survey and (d) radiotherapy utilization (RTU) rates for each tumour site, published by the Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research (IIAMR). RESULTS: In 2015, 30,999 of 45,903 cancer patients would have required radiotherapy. By 2020, this will have increased to 34,041 of 50,427 cancer patients. Switzerland presently has an adequate number of TRTs, but a deficit of 57 ROs, 14 MPs and 36 RTTs. By 2020, an additional 7 TRTs, 72 ROs, 22 MPs and 66 RTTs will be required. In addition, a realistic dynamic model for calculation of staff requirements due to anticipated changes in future radiotherapy practices has been proposed. This model could be tailor-made and individualized for any radiotherapy centre. CONCLUSION: A 9.8 % increase in radiotherapy requirements is expected for cancer patients over the next 5 years. The present study should assist the stakeholders and health planners in designing an appropriate strategy for meeting future radiotherapy needs for Switzerland.