Premium
SU‐F‐T‐251: The Quality Assurance for the Heavy Patient Load Department in the Developing Country: The Primary Experience of An Entire Workflow QA Process Management in Radiotherapy
Author(s) -
Xie J,
Wang J,
Peng J,
Chen J,
Hu W
Publication year - 2016
Publication title -
medical physics
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 1.473
H-Index - 180
eISSN - 2473-4209
pISSN - 0094-2405
DOI - 10.1118/1.4956391
Subject(s) - workflow , quality assurance , checklist , radiation therapy , medical physics , medicine , quality management , process (computing) , radiation oncologist , computer science , operations management , database , radiology , management system , psychology , external quality assessment , pathology , economics , cognitive psychology , operating system
Purpose: To implement an entire workflow quality assurance (QA) process in the radiotherapy department and to reduce the error rates of radiotherapy based on the entire workflow management in the developing country. Methods: The entire workflow QA process management starts from patient registration to the end of last treatment including all steps through the entire radiotherapy process. Error rate of chartcheck is used to evaluate the the entire workflow QA process. Two to three qualified senior medical physicists checked the documents before the first treatment fraction of every patient. Random check of the treatment history during treatment was also performed. A total of around 6000 patients treatment data before and after implementing the entire workflow QA process were compared from May, 2014 to December, 2015. Results: A systemic checklist was established. It mainly includes patient's registration, treatment plan QA, information exporting to OIS(Oncology Information System), documents of treatment QAand QA of the treatment history. The error rate derived from the chart check decreases from 1.7% to 0.9% after our the entire workflow QA process. All checked errors before the first treatment fraction were corrected as soon as oncologist re‐confirmed them and reinforce staff training was accordingly followed to prevent those errors. Conclusion: The entire workflow QA process improved the safety, quality of radiotherapy in our department and we consider that our QA experience can be applicable for the heavily‐loaded radiotherapy departments in developing country.