AAPM WGPE report 394: Simulated error training for the physics plan and chart review.

BACKGROUND: Simulated error training is a method to practice error detection in situations where the occurrence of error is low. Such is the case for the physics plan and chart review where a physicist may check several plans before encountering a significant problem. By simulating potentially hazardous errors, physicists can become familiar with how they manifest and learn from mistakes made during a simulated plan review. PURPOSE: The purpose of this project was to develop a series of training datasets that allows medical physicists and trainees to practice plan and chart reviews in a way that is familiar and accessible, and to provide exposure to the various failure modes (FMs) encountered in clinical scenarios. METHODS: A series of training datasets have been developed that include a variety of embedded errors based on the risk-assessment performed by American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) Task Group 275 for the physics plan and chart review. The training datasets comprise documentation, screen shots, and digital content derived from common treatment planning and radiation oncology information systems and are available via the Cloud-based platform ProKnow. RESULTS: Overall, 20 datasets have been created incorporating various software systems (Mosaiq, ARIA, Eclipse, RayStation, Pinnacle) and delivery techniques. A total of 110 errors representing 50 different FMs were embedded with the 20 datasets. The project was piloted at the 2021 AAPM Annual Meeting in a workshop where participants had the opportunity to review cases and answer survey questions related to errors they detected and their perception of the project's efficacy. In general, attendees detected higher-priority FMs at a higher rate, though no correlation was found between detection rate and the detectability of the FMs. Familiarity with a given system appeared to play a role in detecting errors, specifically when related to missing information at different locations within a given software system. Overall, 96% of respondents either agreed or strongly agreed that the ProKnow portal and training datasets were effective as a training tool, and 75% of respondents agreed or strongly agreed that they planned to use the tool at their local institution. CONCLUSIONS: The datasets and digital platform provide a standardized and accessible tool for training, performance assessment, and continuing education regarding the physics plan and chart review. Work is ongoing to expand the project to include more modalities, radiation oncology treatment planning and information systems, and FMs based on emerging techniques such as auto-contouring and auto-planning.

Implementation of a programmatic assessment model in radiation oncology medical physics training.

PURPOSE: In 2019, a formal review and update of the current training program for medical physics residents/registrars in Australasia was conducted. The purpose of this was to ensure the program met current local clinical and technological requirements, to improve standardization of training across Australia and New Zealand and generate a dynamic curriculum and programmatic assessment model. METHODS: A four-phase project was initiated, including a consultant desktop review of the current program and stakeholder consultation. Overarching program outcomes on which to base the training model were developed, with content experts used to update the scientific content. Finally, assessment specialists reviewed a range of assessment models to determine appropriate assessment methods for each learning outcome, creating a model of programmatic assessment. RESULTS: The first phase identified a need for increased standardized assessment incorporating programmatic assessment. Seven clear program outcome statements were generated and used to guide and underpin the new curriculum framework. The curriculum was expanded from the previous version to include emerging technologies, while removing previous duplication. Finally, a range of proposed assessments for learning outcomes in the curriculum were generated into the programmatic assessment model. These new assessment methods were structured to incorporate rubric scoring to provide meaningful feedback. CONCLUSIONS: An updated training program for Radiation Oncology Medial Physics registrars/residents was released in Australasia. Scientific content from a previous program was used as a foundation and revised for currency with the ability to accommodate a dynamic curriculum model. A programmatic model of assessment was created after comprehensive review and consultation. This new model of assessment provides more structured, ongoing assessment throughout the training period. It contains allowances for local bespoke assessment, and guidance for supervisors by the provision of marking templates and rubrics.

The AAPM/ASTRO 2023 Core Physics Curriculum for Radiation Oncology Residents.

PURPOSE: The American Association of Physicists in Medicine Radiation Oncology Medical Physics Education Subcommittee (ROMPES) has updated the radiation oncology physics core curriculum for medical residents in the radiation oncology specialty. METHODS AND MATERIALS: Thirteen physicists from the United States and Canada involved in radiation oncology resident education were recruited to ROMPES. The group included doctorates and master's of physicists with a range of clinical or academic roles. Radiation oncology physician and resident representatives were also consulted in the development of this curriculum. In addition to modernizing the material to include new technology, the updated curriculum is consistent with the format of the American Board of Radiology Physics Study Guide Working Group to promote concordance between current resident educational guidelines and examination preparation guidelines. RESULTS: The revised core curriculum recommends 56 hours of didactic education like the 2015 curriculum but was restructured to provide resident education that facilitates best clinical practice and scientific advancement in radiation oncology. The reference list, glossary, and practical modules were reviewed and updated to include recent literature and clinical practice examples. CONCLUSIONS: ROMPES has updated the core physics curriculum for radiation oncology residents. In addition to providing a comprehensive curriculum to promote best practice for radiation oncology practitioners, the updated curriculum aligns with recommendations from the American Board of Radiology Physics Study Guide Working Group. New technology has been integrated into the curriculum. The updated curriculum provides a framework to appropriately cover the educational topics for radiation oncology residents in preparation for their subsequent career development.

AAPM Medical physics practice guideline 15.A: Peer review in clinical physics.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and Must Not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. While must is the term to be used in the guidelines, if an entity that adopts the guideline has shall as the preferred term, the AAPM considers that must and shall have the same meaning. Should and Should Not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

Overview of medical physics education and research programs in a non-academic environment.

Northwest Medical Physics Center (NMPC) is a nonprofit organization that provides clinical physics support to over 35 radiation therapy facilities concentrated in the Pacific Northwest. Although clinical service is the primary function of NMPC, the diverse array of clinical sites and physics expertise has allowed for the establishment of structured education and research programs, which are complementary to the organization's clinical mission. Three clinical training programs have been developed at NMPC: a therapy medical physics residency program accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs (CAMPEP), an Applied Physics Technologist (APT) program, and a summer undergraduate internship program. A partnership has also been established with a major radiation oncology clinical vendor for the purposes of validating and testing new clinical devices across multiple facilities. These programs are managed by a dedicated education and research team at NMPC, made up of four qualified medical physicists (QMPs). The education and research work has made a significant contribution to the organization's clinical mission, and it has provided new training opportunities for early-career physicists across many different clinical environments. Education and research can be incorporated into nonacademic clinical environments, improving the quality of patient care, and increasing the number and type of training opportunities available for medical physicists.

The Italian young medical physicist scenario: Results from the young AIFM group survey.

PURPOSE: The young working group of the Italian Association of Medical and Health Physics (AIFM) designed a survey to assess the current situation of the under 35 AIFM members. METHODS: An online survey including 65 questions was designed to gather personal information, educational issues, working and research experience, and to evaluate the AIFM activities. The survey was distributed to the under 35 members between November 2022 and February 2023, through the young AIFM mailing list and social media. RESULTS: 160 answers from 230 affiliates (70%, 31 years median age) were obtained. The results highlighted that 87% of the respondents had a fixed term/permanent employment, mainly in public hospitals (58%). Regarding Medical Physicists (MPs) training, 54% of the students left their region of origin due to the training plan (40%) and the availability of scholarships (25%) in the chosen university. Most of the respondents have no Radiation Protection Expert title, while the remaining 20%, 6%, and 3% are qualified to the first, second, and third level, respectively. Several young MPs (62.2%) were involved in research activities; however, only 28% had teaching experience, mainly within their workplace (20%, safety courses), during AIFM courses (4%), or university lectures (3%). CONCLUSIONS: This survey reported the current situation of the under 35 AIFM members, highlighting the "brain drain" phenomenon from the south to the north of Italy, mainly due to the lack of post-graduate schools, scholarships, and job opportunities. The obtained results will help the future working program of the AIFM.

EFOMP Malaga Declaration 2023: An updated vision on Medical Physics in Europe.

In 2006, the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics (EFOMP) adopted the "Malaga Declaration". The declaration asserted the fundamental role of Medical Physics professionals in the radiation protection of patients, workers, general public, carers and comforters and research participants in hospitals. However, since that time the Medical Physics profession has evolved in Europe and new regulations and documentation have been issued, such as directive 2013/59/Euratom and the "European Guidelines on Medical Physics Expert" (RP174). EFOMP has published updated core-curricula and strived towards the recognition of the profession at the European level. In view of this, an update of the original Malaga Declaration was deemed necessary, to define the future vision that will guide the actions of the Federation in the years to come. This Declaration, which has been approved by the national member organizations of EFOMP in April 2023, is much broader than the original Malaga version. This is expected considering the rapid evolution of medical device technology over the last 17 years. The Radiation Protection Expert in hospital settings should be an MPE, since the latter has the highest level of radiation protection knowledge and training. Given the passion and energy that animated the debate, which led to the updating of the Malaga Declaration, we are confident that it represents a solid basis for the development of our profession in Europe which is in consonance with the aspirations of us all.

EFOMP policy statement 18: Medical physics education for the non-physics healthcare professions.

Although Medical Physics educators have historically contributed to the education of the non-physics healthcare professions, their role was not studied in a systematic manner. In 2009, EFOMP set up a group to research the issue. In their first paper, the group carried out an extensive literature review regarding physics teaching for the non-physics healthcare professions. Their second paper reported the results of a pan-European survey of physics curricula delivered to the healthcare professions and a Strengths-Weaknesses-Opportunities-Threats (SWOT) audit of the role. The group's third paper presented a strategic development model for the role, based on the SWOT data. A comprehensive curriculum development model was subsequently published, whilst plans were laid to develop the present policy statement. This policy statement presents mission and vision statements for Medical Physicists teaching non-physics users of medical devices and physical agents, best practices for teaching non-physics healthcare professionals, a stepwise process for curriculum development (content, method of delivery and assessment), and summary recommendations based on the aforementioned research studies.

EFOMP policy statement 17: The role and competences of medical physicists and medical physics experts in the different stages of a medical device life cycle.

MPPs are trained in the branches of physics associated with the practice of medicine. Possessing a solid scientific background and technical skills, MPPs are well suited to play a leading role within each stage of a medical device life cycle. The various stages of the life cycle of a medical device include establishment of requirements with use-case assessment, investment planning, procurement of medical devices, acceptance testing especially regarding safety and performance, quality management, effective and safe use and maintenance, user training, interfacing with IT systems, and safe decommissioning and removal of the medical devices. Acting as an expert within the clinical staff of a healthcare organisation, the MPP can play an important role to achieve a balanced life cycle management of medical devices. Given that the functioning of medical devices and their clinical application in routine clinical practice and research is heavily physics and engineering based, the MPP is strongly associated with the hard science aspects and advanced clinical applications of medical devices and associated physical agents. Indeed, this is reflected in the mission statement of MPP professionals [1]. PURPOSE: The life cycle management of medical devices is described as well as the procedures involved. These procedures are performed by multi-disciplinary teams within a healthcare environment. The task of this workgroup was focused on clarifying and elaborating the role of the Medical Physicist and Medical Physics Expert - here collectively referred to as the Medical Physics Professional (MPP) - within these multi-disciplinary teams. This policy statement describes the role and competences of MPPs in every stage of a medical device life cycle. If MPPs are an integral part of these multi-disciplinary teams, the effective use, safety, and sustainability of the investment is likely to improve as well as the overall service quality delivered by the medical device during its life cycle. It leads to better health care quality and reduced costs. Furthermore, it gives MPPs a stronger position in health care organisations throughout Europe.

Medical physics practice guideline 4.b: Development, implementation, use and maintenance of safety checklists.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the US. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the US. Existing medical physics practice guidelines will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: Must and must not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. While must is the term to be used in the guidelines, if an entity that adopts the guideline has shall as the preferred term, the AAPM considers that must and shall have the same meaning. Should and should not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances.

AAPM medical physics practice guideline 13.a: HDR brachytherapy, part A.

The American Association of Physicists in Medicine (AAPM) is a nonprofit professional society whose primary purposes are to advance the science, education, and professional practice of medical physics. The AAPM has more than 8000 members and is the principal organization of medical physicists in the United States. The AAPM will periodically define new practice guidelines for medical physics practice to help advance the science of medical physics and to improve the quality of service to patients throughout the United States. Existing medical physics practice guidelines (MPPGs) will be reviewed for the purpose of revision or renewal, as appropriate, on their fifth anniversary or sooner. Each medical physics practice guideline represents a policy statement by the AAPM, has undergone a thorough consensus process in which it has been subjected to extensive review, and requires the approval of the Professional Council. The medical physics practice guidelines recognize that the safe and effective use of diagnostic and therapeutic radiology requires specific training, skills, and techniques, as described in each document. Reproduction or modification of the published practice guidelines and technical standards by those entities not providing these services is not authorized. The following terms are used in the AAPM practice guidelines: (1) Must and must not: Used to indicate that adherence to the recommendation is considered necessary to conform to this practice guideline. (2) Should and should not: Used to indicate a prudent practice to which exceptions may occasionally be made in appropriate circumstances. Approved by AAPM's Executive Committee April 28, 2022.

A Novel Hands-on Approach Towards Teaching Diagnostic Radiology Residents MRI Scanning and Physics.

RATIONALE AND OBJECTIVES: Traditional approaches towards teaching magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scanning and physics have limitations that a hands-on course may help overcome. A dedicated week of MRI instruction may help improve radiology resident confidence and competence. Additional benefits may include improved physician-technologist communication and accelerated mastery of MRI safety. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Surveys and tests were approved by our Program Evaluation Committee and administered at the beginning and at the end of this one-week course. The course consisted of protected reading time as well as practice scanning with a research magnet and assisting with clinical scanning under the close supervision of a licensed MRI technologist. Eighteen senior residents (nine third-year and nine fourth-year) participated in this course during its first year. RESULTS: Few residents had previous experience with MRI physics, scanning, or research prior to residency. After this course, mean resident confidence increased by 0.47 points (3.33 vs 2.86; p=0.01) on a five-point Likert scale. Understanding of MRI physics, as measured by pre- and post-tests, increased by 22% (0.72 vs 0.50; p<0.01), corresponding to a large effect size of 1.29 (p<0.001). Resident feedback reported that this course was efficacious (5/5), engaging (4.9/5), and had optimal faculty oversight. The most highly rated component of the course was the opportunity to experiment with the research MR scanner (5/5). CONCLUSION: A dedicated week of MRI education was highly rated by residents and associated with improvements in confidence and understanding, suggesting a positive correlation between confidence and competence. Additional metrics, such as trends in scores on the American Board of Radiology's Core Examination over the next several years, may further support the apparent benefits of this hands-on MR course.

Statistics in Medical Physics. The 28th European School of Medical Physics Experts.

One of the aims of EFOMP is to organise events for education, training and continuous professional development. For this reason, the European Federation of Organisations for Medical Physics has developed a series of schools, called the European School for Medical Physics Experts (ESMPE). These are designed for medical physicists working as Medical Physics Experts (MPE) or in training to become an MPE and the level of training is at EQF level 8. The quality of training offered is accredited by the European Board for Accreditation in Medical Physics.EFOMP schoolstarget new topics included in the revised core curricula and guidelines for Medical Physics Experts in various subspecialties, which are rapidly evolving, as well as areas where the Medical Physicist plays a key role. The 28th ESMPE school was entitled "Statistics in Medical Physics".

Combined clinical and research training in medical physics in a multi-institutional setting: 13-year experience of Harvard Medical Physics Residency Program.

PURPOSE: This manuscript describes the structure, management and outcomes of a multi-institutional clinical and research medical physics residency program (Harvard Medical Physics Residency Program, or HMPRP) to provide potentially useful information to the centers considering a multi-institutional approach for their training programs. METHODS: Data from the program documents and public records was used to describe HMPRP and obtain statistics about participating faculty, enrolled residents, and graduates. Challenges associated with forming and managing a multi-institutional program and developed solutions for effective coordination between several clinical centers are described. RESULTS: HMPRP was formed in 2009 and was accredited by the Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Education Programs (CAMPEP) in 2011. It is a 3-year therapy program, with a dedicated year of research and the 2 years of clinical training at three academic hospitals. A CAMPEP-accredited Certificate Program is embedded in HMPRP to allow enrolled residents to complete a formal didactic training in medical physics if necessary. The clinical training covers the material required by CAMPEP. In addition, training in protons, CyberKnife, MR-linac, and at network locations is included. The clinical training and academic record of the residents is outstanding. All graduates have found employment within clinical medical physics, mostly at large academic centers and graduates had a 100% pass rate at the oral American Board of Radiology exams. On average, three manuscripts per resident are published during residency, and multiple abstracts are presented at conferences. CONCLUSIONS: A multi-institutional medical physics residency program can be successfully formed and managed. With a collaborative administrative structure, the program creates an environment for high-quality clinical training of the residents and high productivity in research. The main advantage of such program is access to a wide variety of resources. The main challenge is creating a structure for efficient management of multiple resources at different locations. This report may provide valuable information to centers considering starting a multi-institutional residency program.

Evolution and Evaluation of a Structured Applied Physics Course for Radiation Oncology and Radiation Physics Trainees.

We sought to supplement medical physics textbook knowledge and clinical learning with case-based discussions. To our knowledge, this is the first report on a structured combined applied physics curriculum for radiation oncology (RO) and medical physics (MP) trainees. We reviewed our yearly applied physics course given from the years 2016-2021 inclusive. The number of applied physics trainees ranged from 7 to 14 per year (2-9 RO and 3-6 MP residents per year). Each session was taught by a pair of (RO and MP) faculty members. Twenty-nine case-based sessions were given yearly (2016 to 2019). Because of the COVID-19 pandemic restrictions, the course was shortened to 8 case-based sessions in 2020 and 2021. For the years 2016-2021, the mean and median teaching evaluation scores were 4.65 and 5, respectively (range 2-5), where 1 represents worse teaching quality and 5, the best teaching quality. For the year 2021, 2 questions relating to the video virtual format (implemented due to the covid-19 pandemic), revealed consistent high scores with the mean and median responses of 4.14 and 5, respectively (range 1-5). The results from the teaching evaluation scores indicate that the trainees highly valued the teaching sessions and teachers. Our experience indicates that a case-based applied physics course was delivered successfully with continued high teaching evaluation scores. A video virtual platform for an applied physics course could be useful, especially for small programs without a structured applied physics curriculum.

AAPM Report 373: The content, structure, and value of the Professional Doctorate in Medical Physics (DMP).

The Professional Doctorate in Medical Physics (DMP) was originally conceived as a solution to the shortage of medical physics residency training positions. While this shortage has now been largely satisfied through conventional residency training positions, the DMP has expanded to multiple institutions and grown into an educational pathway that provides specialized clinical training and extends well beyond the creation of additional training spots. As such, it is important to reevaluate the purpose and the value of the DMP. Additionally, it is important to outline the defining characteristics of the DMP to assure that all existing and future programs provide this anticipated value. Since the formation and subsequent accreditation of the first DMP program in 2009-2010, four additional programs have been created and accredited. However, no guidelines have yet been recommended by the American Association of Physicists in Medicine. CAMPEP accreditation of these programs has thus far been based only on the respective graduate and residency program standards. This allows the development and operation of DMP programs which contain only the requisite Master of Science (MS) coursework and a 2-year clinical training program. Since the MS plus 2-year residency pathway already exists, this form of DMP does not provide added value, and one may question why this existing pathway should be considered a doctorate. Not only do we, as a profession, need to outline the defining characteristics of the DMP, we need to carefully evaluate the potential advantages and disadvantages of this pathway within our education and training infrastructure. The aims of this report from the Working Group on the Professional Doctorate Degree for Medical Physicists (WGPDMP) are to (1) describe the current state of the DMP within the profession, (2) make recommendations on the structure and content of the DMP for existing and new DMP programs, and (3) evaluate the value of the DMP to the profession of medical physics.

AAPM Task Group 298: Recommendations on certificate program/alternative pathway candidate education and training.

Entry into the field of clinical medical physics is most commonly accomplished through the completion of a Commission on Accreditation of Medical Physics Educational Programs (CAMPEP)-accredited graduate and residency program. To allow a mechanism to bring valuable expertise from other disciplines into clinical practice in medical physics, an "alternative pathway" approach was also established. To ensure those trainees who have completed a doctoral degree in physics or a related discipline have the appropriate background and didactic training in medical physics, certificate programs and a CAMPEP-accreditation process for these programs were initiated. However, medical physics-specific didactic, research, and clinical exposure of those entering medical physics residencies from these certificate programs is often comparatively modest when evaluated against individuals holding Master's and/or Doctoral degrees in CAMPEP-accredited graduate programs. In 2016, the AAPM approved the formation of Task Group (TG) 298, "Alternative Pathway Candidate Education and Training." The TG was charged with reviewing previous published recommendations for alternative pathway candidates and developing recommendations on the appropriate education and training of these candidates. This manuscript is a summary of the AAPM TG 298 report.