Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
The American Society for Radiation Oncology Workforce Taskforce Review of the United States Radiation Oncology Workforce Analysis.
Shah, Chirag; Mohindra, Pranshu; Arnone, Anna; Bates, James Edward; Mattes, Malcolm D; Campbell, Shauna; Fontanilla, Hiral P; Sim, Austin J; Sharp, Hadley J; Kelly, Patrick; Mantz, Constantine; Eichler, Thomas; Sandler, Howard; Fields, Emma; Pinnix, Chelsea C; Vapiwala, Neha; Haffty, Bruce.
Affiliation
  • Shah C; Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio. Electronic address: shahc4@ccf.org.
  • Mohindra P; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Maryland School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland.
  • Arnone A; American Society for Radiation Oncology, Arlington, Virginia.
  • Bates JE; Department of Radiation Oncology, Emory Healthcare, Atlanta, Georgia.
  • Mattes MD; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, RWJ Barnabas Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
  • Campbell S; Department of Radiation Oncology, Taussig Cancer Institute, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, Ohio.
  • Fontanilla HP; Princeton Radiation Oncology, Astera Cancer Care, Monroe, New Jersey.
  • Sim AJ; Department of Radiation Oncology, James Cancer Hospital, Ohio State University Comprehensive Cancer Center, Columbus, Ohio.
  • Sharp HJ; Southeast Radiation Oncology, Charlotte, North Carolina.
  • Kelly P; Orlando Health, Orlando, Florida.
  • Mantz C; GenesisCare, Fort Myers, Florida.
  • Eichler T; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massey Cancer Center Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
  • Sandler H; Department of Radiation Oncology, Cedars-Sinai Medical Center, Los Angeles, California.
  • Fields E; Department of Radiation Oncology, Massey Cancer Center Virginia Commonwealth University, Richmond, Virginia.
  • Pinnix CC; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas.
  • Vapiwala N; Department of Radiation Oncology, University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.
  • Haffty B; Department of Radiation Oncology, Rutgers Cancer Institute of New Jersey, RWJ Barnabas Health, New Brunswick, New Jersey.
Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys ; 116(3): 484-490, 2023 07 01.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36898417
ABSTRACT
Over the past decade, concerns have arisen in radiation oncology regarding potential workforce supply and demand imbalance. The American Society for Radiation Oncology commissioned an independent analysis in 2022, looking at supply and demand in the United States radiation oncology workforce and projecting future trends for 2025 and 2030. The final report, titled Projected Supply and Demand for Radiation Oncologists in the U.S. in 2025 and 2030, is now available. The analysis included evaluating radiation oncologist (RO) supply (new graduates, exits from the specialty), potential changes in demand (growth of Medicare beneficiaries, hypofractionation, loss of indications, new indications) as well as RO productivity (growth of work relative value units [wRVUs] produced), and demand per beneficiary. The results demonstrated a relative balance between radiation oncology supply and demand for radiation services; the growth in ROs was balanced by the rapid growth of Medicare beneficiaries over the same period. The primary factors driving the model were found to be growth of Medicare beneficiaries and change in wRVU productivity, with hypofractionation and loss of indication having only a moderate effect; although the most likely scenario was a balance of workforce supply and demand, scenarios did demonstrate the possibility of over- and undersupply. Oversupply may become a concern if RO wRVU productivity reaches the highest region; beyond 2030, this is also possible if growth in RO supply does not parallel Medicare beneficiary growth, which is projected to decline and will require corresponding supply adjustment. Limitations of the analysis included uncertainty regarding the true number of ROs, the lack of inclusion of most technical reimbursement and its effect as well as failing to account for stereotactic body radiation therapy. A modeling tool is available to allow individuals to evaluate different scenarios. Moving forward, continued study will be needed to evaluate trends (particularly wRVU productivity and Medicare beneficiary growth) to allow for continued assessment of workforce supply and demand in radiation oncology.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiation Oncology Type of study: Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Year: 2023 Document type: Article

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Radiation Oncology Type of study: Prognostic_studies Limits: Aged / Humans Country/Region as subject: America do norte Language: En Journal: Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys Year: 2023 Document type: Article