Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T14:42:43.829Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Factors affecting knowledge sharing in the radiotherapy department: the radiation physics team as a community of practice

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 February 2010

K. Armoogum  and
M. Buchgeister
K. Armoogum
Affiliation:
Department of Medical Physics, The Royal Surrey County Hospital NHS Trust, Guildford, UK
M. Buchgeister
Affiliation:
Medizinische Physik, Universitätsklinik Für Radioonkologie, Tübingen, Germany
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We put forward the concept of the radiotherapy physics team as a community of practice (COP). Radiotherapy physicists are required to continuously develop their scientific, computational and management competencies. Much of this knowledge is gained through peer-to-peer interaction in a structured environment, enabling the individual to increase their tacit knowledge. Such interaction among peers will allow issues to be framed within their context, information to be shared, decisions to be made and protocols to be developed. The structure that allows physicists to create, share and manage knowledge conforms to the accepted definition of a COP. By implementing the methods of literature review and peer group survey, we have investigated the applicability of the concept of a radiotherapy physics COP. The results of the survey have shown a generally positive medical physicist training outlook in the UK and Germany, but highlighted certain areas where improvement is needed. Our surveys have shown that while most trainees are adequately supported, there are two areas where improvements can easily be made. Spatial factors, such as departmental geography, may not always be conducive to knowledge sharing but can readily be altered in most cases. The paucity of departmental seminars and journal club meetings has been highlighted as a problem at some training centres.

Keywords

Radiotherapyknowledge sharingcommunity of practicetacit knowledgeimplicit knowledge
Type
Original Article
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 9 , Issue 1 , March 2010 , pp. 17 - 26
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2010

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Williams, M. NRAG recommendations for developing radiotherapy in England. Clin Oncol 2007; 19: S12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ruopp, R. LabNet: Toward a community of practice. J Sci Educ Technol 1993; 2: 305–319.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sandars, J, Heller, R. Improving the implementation of evidence-based practice: a knowledge management perspective. J Eval Clin Pract 2006; 12: 341–346.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Argote, L, Ingram, P, Levine, JM, Moreland, RL. Knowledge transfer in organisations: learning from the experience of others. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 2000; 82: 1–8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Britten, N. Qualitative interviews in medical research. BMJ 1995; 311: 251–253.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bate, SP, Robert, G. Knowledge management and communities of practice in the private sector: lessons for modernising the National Health Service in England and Wales. Public Adm 2002; 80: 642–663.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boud, D, Middleton, H. Learning from others at work: communities of practice and informal learning. J Workplace Learn 2003; 15: 194–202.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gunderman, R, Chan, S. Knowledge sharing in radiology. Radiology 2003; 229: 314–317.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bridge, P, Appleyard, RM, Ward, JW, Philips, R, Beavis, AW. Development and evaluation of a virtual radiotherapy treatment machine using an immersive visualization environment. Comput Educ 2007; 49: 481–494.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wigfield, A, Eccles, JS. Expectancy-value theory of achievement motivation. Contemp Educ Psychol 2000; 25: 68–81.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gorry, GA. Sharing knowledge in the public sector: two case studies. Knowl Manag Res Pract 2008; 6: 105–111.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Fraser, V, Marcella, R, Middleton, I. Employee perceptions of knowledge sharing: Employment threat or synergy for the greater good? A case study. Competitive Intell Rev 2001; 11: 39–52.3.0.CO;2-J>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Laalo, AT. Intranets and competitive intelligence: Creating access to knowledge. Competitive Intell Rev 2001; 9: 63–72.3.0.CO;2-2>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hansen, MT, Nohria, N, Tierney, T. What's your strategy for managing knowledge? Harv Bus Rev 1999; 77: 106–116.Google ScholarPubMed
Wenger, E. Communities of practice and social learning systems. Organ 1999; 7: 225–246.Google Scholar
Wucherer, M, Herrmann, T. Zur Lage der Medizinischen Physik im Bereich der Strahlentherapie; Gemeinsame Erklärung der DGMP und DEGRO. www.dgmp.de/Page_Papiere/DGMP_DEGRO.pdf (2001).Google Scholar
Armoogum, K, Ackland, C, Gardner, J. Implementation and experiences of an intraoperative radiotherapy service. J Radiother Pract 2006; 5: 203–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar