This poster is published under an
open license. Please read the
disclaimer for further details.
Keywords:
Radiation physics, Breast, CT, Radiation therapy / Oncology, Safety, Radiation safety, Radiotherapy techniques, Education and training, Workforce
Authors:
L. Grillone1, L. Castriotta2, F. Bellomo2, M. A. Signor2, A. Liberale2, V. Pratillo2, C. Foti2, M. Noselli2, S. Brusaferro2; 1Udine, IT/IT, 2Udine/IT
DOI:
10.1594/ecr2017/C-3028
Results
Eight main phases (patient acceptance,
chemotherapy,
simulation,
evaluation in Health Physics,
development of treatment plan,
treatment,
end of therapy),
98 activities and 143 PFMs were identified. As Figure 1 shows,
three different hospital units,
depicted in different colours,
are involved in the pathway: Radiotherapy (in blue),
Oncology (in green) and Health Physics (in orange).
The RPN values,
assigned for every PFM,
ranged from a minimum score of 1 to a maximum of 60.
We calculated mode (12),
median (12) as central tendency indexes and interquartile range (15) as measure of dispersion.Thirty RPN values resulted above the chosen cut-off (RPN >18).
We designed simple corrective actions for the thirty PFMs considered,
that could be summarized in 3 major aspects: 1) periodic training courses for professionals to refresh protocols in use; 2) review of the commitment of the physicians (avoiding simultaneous activities); 3) a different storage of the records/charts.
After we planned sustainable actions for PFMs above the cut-off,
we assigned new scores (Figure2) that underlined a statistically significant decrease of the estimated risk (P value < 0.0001): median score decreased from 12 to 6,
interquartile range from 15 to 9 .