Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-94fs2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-10T11:05:03.779Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Implementing Radiation Oncology Care Plans as a foundation for process improvement

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 December 2015

Edwin H. Chan ,
Shaziya Malam  and
James Loudon
Edwin H. Chan*
Affiliation:
Stronach Regional Cancer Centre, Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, ON, Canada Sheffield Hallam University, Sheffield, United Kingdom
Shaziya Malam
Affiliation:
Stronach Regional Cancer Centre, Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, ON, Canada
James Loudon
Affiliation:
Stronach Regional Cancer Centre, Southlake Regional Health Centre, Newmarket, ON, Canada
*
Correspondence to: Edwin H. Chan, Stronach Regional Cancer Centre, Southlake Regional Health Centre, 596 Davis Drive, Newmarket, ON, Canada L3Y 2P9. Tel: 1 905 895 4521, ext 2161; E-mail: ehchan@southlakeregional.org
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Background

At The Radiation Medicine Program described, the entire radiation therapy (RT) workflow was previously conducted through the use of two electronic programs. It duplicated workflow and created a situation where it was difficult to measure the RT process. Recent enhancements to the electronic medical record facilitated the consolidation of RT planning and treatment workflows into one electronic system.

Purpose

This report will describe the clinical implementation of electronic Radiation Oncology (RO) Care Plans at a Regional Cancer Centre, and how they can be applied as a foundation for RT process improvements.

Impact and outcome

A total of 51 Care Plans and 95 IQ Scripts were successfully implemented. The benefits of RO Care Plans include a more streamlined process, removed ambiguity, improved communication, standardised workflow and automation of tasks. In addition, multiple performance indicators can be obtained from the RO Care Plans, such as caseload reports, workflow reports and a ‘white board’.

Conclusion

The implementation of RO Care Plans serves as a foundation for data-driven process improvement at a local Regional Cancer Centre.

Keywords

professional practicequality assuranceradiation therapy workflowsafetystandardisation
Type
Technical Note
Information
Journal of Radiotherapy in Practice , Volume 15 , Issue 1 , March 2016 , pp. 91 - 98
Check for updates
Copyright
© Cambridge University Press 2015 

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

1.Albuquerque, K, Miller, A, Roeske, J. Implementation of electronic checklists in an oncology medical record: initial clinical experience. J Oncol Pract 2011; 7 (4): 222–226.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Elekta. MOSAIQ workflow management with IQ Scripts. http://www.elekta.com/dms/elekta/elekta-assets/Elekta- Software/pdfs/LPCMSQ120506/MOSAIQ®%20IQ%20Scripts™%20Brochure.pdf. Accessed on 2nd April 2015.Google Scholar
3.Chera, B, Jackson, M, Mazur, Let al. Improving quality of patient care by improving daily practice in radiation oncology. Semin Radiat Oncol 2012; 22 (1): 77–85.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Marks, L, Jackson, M, Xie, Let al. The challenge of maximizing safety in radiation oncology. Pract Radiat Oncol 2011; 1 (1): 2–14.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
5.Rivera, A, Karsh, B. Human factors and systems engineering approach to patient safety for radiotherapy. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2008; 71 (suppl 1): S174–S177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
6.Southlake Regional Health Centre. Transforming health care with our patients, our people, our partners: 2013–2018 strategic plan. http://www.southlakeregional.org/Default.aspx?cid=1088. Accessed on 30th March 2015.Google Scholar
7.Chao, S, Meier, T, Hugebeck, Bet al. Workflow enhancement (WE) improves safety in radiation oncology: putting the WE and team together. Int J Radiat Oncol Biol Phys 2014; 89 (4): 765–772.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed