Establishing a palliative Advanced Practice Radiation Therapist role: A viable alternative to a Rapid Access Palliative Radiation Therapy clinic in Australia.

INTRODUCTION: A recent survey found that Rapid Access Palliative Radiation Therapy (RAPRT) clinics have not been widely embraced in Australia and New Zealand for many reasons. The purpose of this narrative is to describe the transition of a Brisbane, Queensland, RAPRT clinic to an Advanced Practice Radiation Therapist (APRT) model to further improve access and delivery of palliative radiation therapy at that centre. METHODS: The weekly RAPRT clinic commenced in 2005, run by one Radiation Oncologist (RO). The role of the attending senior Radiation Therapist (RT) was mainly to facilitate rapid passage of patients from clinic to treatment. However, because individual ROs preferred to retain care of their own patients, capture of the relevant population was limited. It was therefore decided in 2012 to gradually transition to a model where the RT would work with all ROs and manage all palliative patients from referral to follow-up, under RO supervision. RESULTS: The steps to this palliative APRT pathway involved formulation of the role description, mentoring/training of the RT, overseas site visits, further post-graduate education, funding of the position, staff feedback surveys, evaluation studies and endorsement by professional bodies, leading to formal credentialing in 2017. Importantly, the APRT undertakes all steps in the pathway including field or volume delineation (with approval and sign-off by the responsible RO). The role has come to be highly valued by all disciplines. CONCLUSION: The successful establishment of a palliative APRT role in one Australian centre serves as a template for others wishing to create a similar position.

Prognostic tools for survival prediction in advanced cancer patients: A systematic review.

Survival prediction for palliative cancer patients by physicians is often optimistic. Patients with a very short life expectancy (<4 weeks) may not benefit from radiation therapy (RT), as the time to maximal symptom relief after treatment can take 4-6 weeks. We aimed to identify a prognostic tool (or tools) to predict survival of less than 4 weeks and less than 3 months in patients with advanced cancer to guide the choice of radiation dose and fractionation. We searched Embase, Medline (EBSCOhost) and CINAHL (EBSCOhost) clinical databases for literature published between January 2008 and June 2018. Seventeen studies met the inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Prediction accuracy at less than 4 weeks and less than 3 months were compared across the prognostic tools. Reporting of prediction accuracy among the different studies was not consistent: the Palliative Prognostic Score (PaP), Palliative Prognostic Index (PPI) and Number of Risk Factors (NRF) best-predicted survival duration of less than 4 weeks. The PPI, performance status with Palliative Prognostic Index (PS-PPI), NRF and Survival Prediction Score (SPS) may predict 3-month survival. We recommend PPI and PaP tools to assess the likelihood of a patient surviving less than 4 weeks. If predicted to survive longer and RT is justified, the NRF tool could be used to determine survival probability less than 3 months which can then help clinicians select dose and fractionation. Future research is needed to verify the reliability of survival prediction using these prognostic tools in a radiation oncology setting.

An evaluation of an advanced practice role in palliative radiation therapy.

INTRODUCTION: The purpose of the study was to evaluate the palliative advanced practice radiation therapy (APRT) role with respect to the impact on waiting times for patients from referral to radiation treatment delivery, the ability of the APRT to define palliative radiation therapy fields and patient satisfaction. The evaluation of the impact of the APRT role and referral pathway on patient waiting times has been previously published. METHODS: Patients were allocated to two different pathways; APRT and standard. Patients in the APRT pathway had their radiotherapy treatment managed by the APRT including defining their palliative fields blinded to the radiation oncologist (RO). RESULTS: Of the 150 palliative patients, 94 had their radiation therapy managed by the APRT and 56 were managed through the standard pathway. 82/92 APRT defined fields were accepted by the RO. CONCLUSIONS: Inter-observer variability between the APRT and the RO in defining palliative radiation therapy fields is similar to that reported in the literature between clinicians. With previously published reduced wait times from referral to treatment for palliative patients, the establishment of the APRT role is justified.

Reducing radiotherapy waiting times for palliative patients: The role of the Advanced Practice Radiation Therapist.

INTRODUCTION: Palliative radiotherapy is effective in reducing symptom burden and improving quality of life in patients with symptomatic metastatic cancer and should be delivered in a timely manner. The aim of this study was to determine whether referring patients directly to a Palliative Advanced Practice Radiation Therapist (APRT) improves access to palliative radiotherapy and reduces time from referral to treatment. METHODS: At Radiation Oncology Mater Center (ROMC) in Brisbane, Australia a new referral pathway was developed which involved patients requiring palliative radiotherapy, being referred directly to the APRT from a single external hospital medical oncology and palliative care departments. Over a 5 months period, patient demographics and time in working days from referral to treatment were compared for consecutive palliative patients seen within our department. Patients were stratified by method of referral i.e. via the new referral pathway (NP) or via standard referral pathway (SP). RESULTS: Between October 2014 and March 2015, a total of 150 patients were referred for palliative radiotherapy. Of these patients, 48 were referred and processed via the NP. There was a significant reduction in the number of days from referral to treatment for patients referred through the NP. Patients referred through the NP via the APRT had a mean and median wait time of 3.5 and 3 days respectively compared with 8.1 and 5 days for patients referred through the SP (P = <0.001). Patients were also more likely to have the treatment completed with less visits to the hospital (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The new referral pathway utilising a dedicated palliative APRT decreased waiting times for patients receiving palliative radiotherapy and improved timely access to the radiotherapy service for both referrers and patients.