Cargando…
Radiation therapy staffing model 2014
INTRODUCTION: In 2001, the Radiation Therapy Advisory Panel (RTAP) of the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) (formerly known as Australian Institute of Radiography) published a model for radiation therapist staffing in Australian radiation oncology departments. Betw...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
John Wiley and Sons Inc.
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5167329/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27910290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.198 |
_version_ | 1782483160710250496 |
---|---|
author | Smith, Leigh J. Kearvell, Rachel Arnold, Anthony J. Choma, Kevina Cooper, Aniko Young, Michael R. Matthews, Donna L. Hilder, Bronwyn Howson, Debbie Fox, Katherine Churcher, Katheryn |
author_facet | Smith, Leigh J. Kearvell, Rachel Arnold, Anthony J. Choma, Kevina Cooper, Aniko Young, Michael R. Matthews, Donna L. Hilder, Bronwyn Howson, Debbie Fox, Katherine Churcher, Katheryn |
author_sort | Smith, Leigh J. |
collection | PubMed |
description | INTRODUCTION: In 2001, the Radiation Therapy Advisory Panel (RTAP) of the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) (formerly known as Australian Institute of Radiography) published a model for radiation therapist staffing in Australian radiation oncology departments. Between 2012–2013, the model was reviewed to ensure it reflected current radiation therapy practice, technology, and to facilitate forward planning of the radiation therapy workforce. METHOD: Twenty‐four sites from all states participated and provided data on megavoltage simulation, planning and treatment delivery. For simulation and planning activity, the length of time to complete was collected against relevant Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items. For treatment delivery, time to complete activities was collected against a common set of activities. Modelling assumptions are clearly identified in the methodology. RESULTS: A new model was developed retaining the essential model parameter of full‐time equivalent (FTE) radiation therapists (RTs) per linear accelerator operating hour as in the 2001 model but based on contemporary practice and data. The model also includes significant refinements that improve the model's overall utility and flexibility for both workforce planning purposes and for individual services to use the model according to their own organisational needs and service delivery profiles. CONCLUSION: The ASMIRT believes that the 2014 RT staffing model provides the utility and flexibility for radiation oncology services to best plan RT staffing establishments according to their needs and reflecting the diversity between services and within the sector. It should also provide a robust and valid basis for governments and service planners to use as a guide in workforce planning into the future. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-5167329 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | John Wiley and Sons Inc. |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-51673292016-12-28 Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 Smith, Leigh J. Kearvell, Rachel Arnold, Anthony J. Choma, Kevina Cooper, Aniko Young, Michael R. Matthews, Donna L. Hilder, Bronwyn Howson, Debbie Fox, Katherine Churcher, Katheryn J Med Radiat Sci Original Articles INTRODUCTION: In 2001, the Radiation Therapy Advisory Panel (RTAP) of the Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy (ASMIRT) (formerly known as Australian Institute of Radiography) published a model for radiation therapist staffing in Australian radiation oncology departments. Between 2012–2013, the model was reviewed to ensure it reflected current radiation therapy practice, technology, and to facilitate forward planning of the radiation therapy workforce. METHOD: Twenty‐four sites from all states participated and provided data on megavoltage simulation, planning and treatment delivery. For simulation and planning activity, the length of time to complete was collected against relevant Medicare Benefits Schedule (MBS) items. For treatment delivery, time to complete activities was collected against a common set of activities. Modelling assumptions are clearly identified in the methodology. RESULTS: A new model was developed retaining the essential model parameter of full‐time equivalent (FTE) radiation therapists (RTs) per linear accelerator operating hour as in the 2001 model but based on contemporary practice and data. The model also includes significant refinements that improve the model's overall utility and flexibility for both workforce planning purposes and for individual services to use the model according to their own organisational needs and service delivery profiles. CONCLUSION: The ASMIRT believes that the 2014 RT staffing model provides the utility and flexibility for radiation oncology services to best plan RT staffing establishments according to their needs and reflecting the diversity between services and within the sector. It should also provide a robust and valid basis for governments and service planners to use as a guide in workforce planning into the future. John Wiley and Sons Inc. 2016-12-02 2016-12 /pmc/articles/PMC5167329/ /pubmed/27910290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.198 Text en © 2016 The Authors. Journal of Medical Radiation Sciences published by John Wiley & Sons Australia, Ltd on behalf of Australian Society of Medical Imaging and Radiation Therapy and New Zealand Institute of Medical Radiation Technology. This is an open access article under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution‐NonCommercial‐NoDerivs (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0/) License, which permits use and distribution in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited, the use is non‐commercial and no modifications or adaptations are made. |
spellingShingle | Original Articles Smith, Leigh J. Kearvell, Rachel Arnold, Anthony J. Choma, Kevina Cooper, Aniko Young, Michael R. Matthews, Donna L. Hilder, Bronwyn Howson, Debbie Fox, Katherine Churcher, Katheryn Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title | Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title_full | Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title_fullStr | Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title_full_unstemmed | Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title_short | Radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
title_sort | radiation therapy staffing model 2014 |
topic | Original Articles |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5167329/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/27910290 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jmrs.198 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT smithleighj radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT kearvellrachel radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT arnoldanthonyj radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT chomakevina radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT cooperaniko radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT youngmichaelr radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT matthewsdonnal radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT hilderbronwyn radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT howsondebbie radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT foxkatherine radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 AT churcherkatheryn radiationtherapystaffingmodel2014 |